iPod touch burns from within with fiery passion... and fire

We apologize for the blurriness of the image -- imagine you are looking through the photographer's tears -- but what you see before you is supposedly an esploded iPod touch. Tipster Max S. tells us he had the pleasurable experience of having his touch catch on fire between the glass and the components, which can't have been a fun time for the iPod. The heat managed to burn his desk, and needless to say Max won't be getting any more use out of the thing. Apple has been kind enough to issue a free replacement, and is apparently going to look into the situation to see how much of an anomaly this is. This is of course "hot" on the heels of that iPod nano incident, and while an exploding iPod situation would be bad enough for Apple and consumers, what we're really not looking forward to is the inevitable DOT ban on PMPs. Let's hope these are some isolated incidents, or Apple pays off the right people to hush up about it. There's another blurry shot after the break.

Update: Max wrote back to tell us that Steve Jobs' personal staff is apparently in touch with him after Max emailed Apple about the incident. Supposedly he might be getting some compensation for the ordeal, but doesn't seem quite as chipper about the ordeal as his first email suggested: "Still, my iPod burned. *sad face*" You gotta keep it together, Max!

Update 2: Apple gave Max a £25 (about $50 US) gift certificate to the Apple Store in addition to the replacement he already got for the iPod touch. Is that the happy ending to this sordid tale of destruction and woe?

[julia @ Mar 12th 2008 8:32PM]

Ooh. I don't want my shiny iPod touch to asplode when I get it... soon...

[yoyodude64 @ Mar 12th 2008 8:34PM]

lets see...nano, itouch...o god. please dont let the iphones go next. then ill b worried. and it already rubs hot.

*runs to get a bucket of water*

just in case

[PeterF @ Mar 12th 2008 8:49PM]

iPod touch, not iTouch

[Zeus.:God @ Mar 12th 2008 9:09PM]

iTouch for short, nooblet. Actually, wasn't it originally going to be called the iTouch?

[Zorque @ Mar 12th 2008 9:10PM]

Tell me you didn't just use the word nooblet unironically.

[Macha88 @ Mar 12th 2008 9:11PM]

iTouch Myself at night

[mushrooshi @ Mar 12th 2008 9:13PM]

Shivers crawl up my spine when ppl say "iTouch".

[James @ Mar 12th 2008 9:21PM]

It sends shivers down peoples spines when iTouch them.

[alex @ Mar 12th 2008 9:41PM]

its actually its ipod touch. theres no short name. and "nooblet"? wtf? i bet you, you dont know how to jailbreak the ipod touch 1.1.4 or do other things on it. stupidass.

[Dustin Frazier @ Mar 13th 2008 10:51PM]

Lol Alex. And no, I'm not laughing with you.

[mushrooshi @ Mar 12th 2008 9:54PM]

Actually, iPod Touch (You forgot capitalizing).

[Reader @ Mar 12th 2008 9:55PM]

I'm just gonna pretend your whole statement was sarcasm, alex.

[Mike Jenkins @ Mar 12th 2008 10:18PM]

Sadly, it wasn't. The mark of a true nooblet.

[MediaMoshPit @ Mar 19th 2008 10:21PM]

In soviet Russia, iTouch TouchU.

[Zeus.:God @ Mar 13th 2008 10:45AM]

Yeah, because I certainly do care to know how to "jailbreak" a product I don't, and likely never will, own.

*rolls eyes*

[Matt @ Mar 14th 2008 11:37PM]

hooray, i finally have reason to use this.
Alex, fail...

[James @ Mar 12th 2008 8:37PM]

Can you please whipe that greese off your lens before taking the pictures?

[applet @ Mar 12th 2008 8:57PM]

It's not grease, that's how pictures taken on the iPhone normally look.

[Grant @ Mar 12th 2008 8:59PM]

Hahaha

[James @ Mar 12th 2008 9:04PM]

oh im sorry i thought he was cooking bacon in the background

[Laurence @ Mar 12th 2008 8:42PM]

Is it just me, or does everybody that has something happen to them not have a good camera or something? Am I the only one who carrys a DSLR around with me?

[Ian @ Mar 12th 2008 8:48PM]

probably not, but i do agree people need to at lest let the camera focus on what ever they are shooting so people like us can at lest see what the hell they are talking about

[Joseph @ Mar 12th 2008 8:51PM]

No one owns a macro lens.

[Christian @ Mar 12th 2008 8:53PM]

I think some people don't know most of the functions of their own cameras, such as this shot that propbably just needed to turn on Macro.

[Tony @ Mar 13th 2008 12:20AM]

You don't need a macro lens for a shot like this, the 'photographer' just need to learn how to press the shutter button properly.

[DarkLightConnection Unbanned @ Mar 13th 2008 12:52AM]

Yes, you are the only one who carry a DSLR arround with you.

I don't even have a digital camera... Nothing interesting happens to me, there's no reason to have one...

[TheGoog @ Mar 13th 2008 9:22AM]

A DSLR is defenitely not needed for close-up shooting. Making a comment like that just points out how little you know about photography and makes one wonder if you'd even know how to make use of the advantages a DSLR has.

[Bauer22 @ Mar 12th 2008 8:40PM]

First it was the bad dark screens, then the $20 dollar updates, now this. Dont you people see Apple wants you to buy a iPhone!!

[Jake E. @ Mar 12th 2008 8:57PM]

iPhones had the bad dark screen, too. I had one but I unlocked it, sold it on eBay, and bought a new one at no extra cost. :)

[Tiu @ Mar 12th 2008 8:42PM]

Looks Photoshopped with Gaussian blur.

[Max Shanly @ Mar 12th 2008 8:54PM]

It wasn't.

[Jake E. @ Mar 12th 2008 8:58PM]

@Tiu

Tell that to the guy who's iPod got fried.

[Max Shanly @ Mar 12th 2008 8:59PM]

I am the guy who's iPod got fried. :(

[Macha88 @ Mar 12th 2008 9:17PM]

Well, speak of the devil.

[Jacob @ Mar 13th 2008 3:15PM]

Max Shanly is the devil? Well no wonder his iTouch burst into flame!

...and that would also explain why Steve Jobs gave him an extra $50. :-)

[James Cameron @ Mar 12th 2008 8:45PM]

Didn't Greenpeace said something about the iphone having some kind of Hazardous Chemicals components?

[mushrooshi @ Mar 12th 2008 9:54PM]

its "iPhone", not "iphone".

[thomasora @ Mar 12th 2008 10:06PM]

"its "iPhone", not "iphone"."

and it is "it's", not its.

[Macha88 @ Mar 12th 2008 11:21PM]

Who cares? ITS A FRIGGIN iPhone!!!!

[John Bailey @ Mar 13th 2008 1:14AM]

Don't think so... The reality distortion field does cause a feeling of lightness in one's bank account though

[ZeroCorpse @ Mar 12th 2008 8:47PM]

See what happens when you jailbreak?

XD

[Special_K @ Mar 12th 2008 11:24PM]

Exactly! Apple is just protecting us from ourselves. Only they can control the unholy demonic power that lies within the iPod Touch. Anyone who attempts to do so, other than the Chosen One Jobs (*genuflects, averts eyes*) shall open a portal to Oblivion, and swallow humanity into a pit of damnation from which we shall never escape! This is but a sign, people! Obey the Chosen One (*genuflects, averts eyes*)! Do not jailbreak, lest the blood of the innocents soaks YOUR HANDS!!!

[Joe @ Mar 12th 2008 8:52PM]

Now THATS what I call flame-bait.


(sorry)

[Carl Vitullo @ Mar 12th 2008 9:01PM]

/facepalm

[Seth Furman @ Mar 12th 2008 9:17PM]

And people said you couldn't brick your iPod touch...

[computer.dude.28 @ Mar 12th 2008 9:12PM]

AHAHAHAHA esploded.

[QueenOfSwords @ Mar 12th 2008 9:27PM]

Is that even a Touch? The home key is wrong. And the face bezel on an iPod Touch is not chrome (though I guess that's from reflected light in the second pic).
I think we're seeing some sort of asian knockoff after an 'incident' with a cigarette lighter.

[UKNigel @ Mar 12th 2008 10:41PM]

Yes, of course its a knockoff, and so Apple is replacing it.

[QueenOfSwords @ Mar 13th 2008 7:15AM]

Well its good they're replacing it without any bother, if that's the case . I'm just pointing out that the home button doesn't look like it belongs to an iPod Touch. Not that one can rule out all sorts of artifacting on a picture that low res.

[John @ Mar 12th 2008 9:29PM]

Burn baby burn, disco inferno >_