TSA causes MacBook Air owner to miss flight

The TSA has been known to take issue with products designed in Cupertino before, but for one particular traveler, it was Apple's thinnest laptop ever that caused the latest holdup.

Upon tossing his ultra-sleek slab of aluminum underneath the scanner, security managed to find enough peculiarities to remove it from the flow, pull it aside and wrangle up the owner for some questions. Apparently, the TSA employee manning the line was flabbergasted by the "lack of a drive" and the complete absence of "ports on the back," and while hordes of co-workers swarmed to investigate, the user's flight took off on schedule.

Thankfully, said owner was finally allowed to pass through after some more in-the-know colleagues explained in painfully simple terms what an SSD was, but the poor jet-setter most definitely paid the price for trying to slip some of the latest and greatest under the sharp eyes of the TSA (and cutting it close on time, of course).

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Inno Setup 5.2.3

Next Story

Hulu Goes Public on Wednesday

46 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

So what you're really saying is that if that person would've had a "Windows Laptop" that person wouldn't have been stopped?
On the one hand, Apple may have finally found its target audience... what with these 'new features' being touted about and the apparent connotation that a terrorist could advantage one's self... by... um... using an Apple laptop... ...which will now, because of a news story [sic] receive less scrutinization?
And on the other hand... hiding something in plain sight is the best way to... oh wait, that's the same hand.

Now we have 'technology profiling'.

Another one of the 1,523 reasons I do not fly!
Here you have another government agency, with people who will for the only time in their lives, actually be OVER someone,
who will take great pleasure in screwing up your day.
Show up 2-3 hours BEFORE a 2 hour flight? Screw that! I'll just drive to where I need to go.

For my first ever news comment, i must say this is pretty pants. Viral advertising aside, this story is tosh laden with yet more tosh. Yes I'm English, and therefore, not seduced by this rhetoric.

Pretty ironic how it is called the Macbook "Air" yet has problems getting through Airport security if you ask me

(Johnr said @ #13)
Pretty ironic how it is called the Macbook "Air" yet has problems getting through Airport security if you ask me :D

-1

TSA: Oh really?
Guy: Yes sir.
TSA: Oh really?
Guy: Amm, yes sir it is a laptop, no moving parts, SSD hard drive
TSA: So, like, you mean, like oh really?
Guy: *annoyed* YEs sir, i will miss my flight.
TSA: Oh really? ... Ei, yo, compadres come check this out a laptop, crazy this ...
Guy: Sir, my flight ....
TSA: Oh really? ... sir back away, stay back, come this way .... *in a demanding tone ...

:
:
:

you guys get the idea ....

*after 30 mins...

TSA: You may go now..
Guy: But i lost my flight ...
TSA: Oh really?

Never had a issue like that with my eee pc, i did get one guy telling me that its only laptops which need to go threw separate not portable dvd players!

(.kvn said @ #9)
This makes front page news!

I missed my train the other day because my laptop with Vista wouldn't shut down quit enough and I was late leaving the house.

Based on the criterias here, I guess it could've made front page news.

Been there before... had my system searched because it had no HDD in it! (its an eee pc) they thought it was supicious there was no magnetic drive in the system... :rolleyes:

(standard search, make sure it turns on, works etc... although the person who did it had no clue what linux was and asked me to click the start menu......)

The guy is clearly a douche that showed up late even though he supposedly travels a lot and should know better. They did a simple inspection and just took him aside and had him boot it up to make sure it was functional. This is an example of the TSA doing their job right, inspecting something suspicious. New technology (the solid state disk in this case) is always going to be suspicious because it's unfamiliar.

So some airport security got suspicious because the x-ray on the brand new MBA with SSD didn't reveal what it usually does as with the gazillions of laptops with normal HDDs so they pulled it out because they weren't uptodate on the latest overpriced trendwhore hardware, big ****ing deal.
The comments on Engadget are hilarious. I wonder what these moronic bashers would say if the TSA shrugged it off and there was really an explosive device in place of a HDD.

This is only news because it involves an OMG Apple product.

I heard some guy missed his flight because Apple advertising execs disrupted the connecting flight while thinking of made-up stories to spread around the internet for a viral advertising campaign.


*gasp*

That explains why a mostly useless computer with a "'lack of a drive" and the complete absence of "ports on the back"' is summed up at the end of the article as "latest and greatest".

I wonder if the guy tried to pass it through in an inter-office envelope just like in the commercial. Either way, having security question your device is always good publicity

(shirike said @ #1)
viral advertising campaign

That's not viral advertising. Viral advertising by definition cannot be created/planned/guessed/whatever.

(tiagosilva29 said @ #1.4)

That's not viral advertising. Viral advertising by definition cannot be created/planned/guessed/whatever.

so none of the MS origami or champion virals were planned... what ?

(tiagosilva29 said @ #1.4)

That's not viral advertising. Viral advertising by definition cannot be created/planned/guessed/whatever.

My brain just hurts after this!

Good spot. Its definitely a media plant of some sort. Wether its "viral" or not, the wording is certainly with an intention towards advertising by carefully pointing out the new "features" of this laptop.

Whether the traveller was employed by Apple or not, I can understand this would be frustrating as a travel experience. But I'd rather they check 100% than letting some things by because it "looks" like a laptop.

(tiagosilva29 said @ #1.4)

That's not viral advertising. Viral advertising by definition cannot be created/planned/guessed/whatever.

That doesn't make the least bit of sense, but how about cheap publicity stunt instead, then?

(Boz said @ #1.6)
My brain just hurts after this!

I'm sure it did. GOTO 1.8

(n_K said @ #1.5)
so none of the MS origami or champion virals were planned... what ?

Not viral advertising. GOTO 1.8

(GreyWolfSC said @ #1.8)
That doesn't make the least bit of sense, but how about cheap publicity stunt instead, then? :rolleyes:

It makes sense. You just don't realize it because you're not from advertising/marketing or probably don't know anyone in the medium (even if you do, most are full of ****). I, for once, know what I'm talking about. My girlfriend's an advertiser. I attended some of her classes (don't tell her), and helped her in several projects.
In last year's Cannes Advertising Festival there was even (redundant) talks about viral advertising.
Viral advertising isn't created and cannot isn't conceived. Viral advertising are trends that were not placed, and that hust outbroke(?) of pure chance, due to mimic reflexions.
Viral advertising is someone putting a (random) image at a forum signature, just because, and that same signature (and the product/person that was linked to that) gets noticed and enters into the mainstream, the social environment and it's not controlled. This all happened not because it was planned (it wasn't), but it was a fluke.
I love the Wiki's article on this. Crap and poop.
A similar event occurs with memes, but it's very distinct. If you preemptively create something in order to achieve what viral advertising, then it's clearly not viral advertising because: cannot be created/cannot be controlled, it happened with no intention, due to chance and social interaction and mimics.
What you're trying to say could be buzz marketing, but what the heck.

(tiagosilva29 said @ #1.9)
Viral advertising isn't created and cannot isn't conceived.

So all these advertising agencies claiming to specialise in Viral Marketing are mistaken/lying?

(tiagosilva29 said @ #1.9)

I'm sure it did. GOTO 1.8


Not viral advertising. GOTO 1.8


It makes sense. You just don't realize it because you're not from advertising/marketing or probably don't know anyone in the medium (even if you do, most are full of ****). I, for once, know what I'm talking about. My girlfriend's an advertiser. I attended some of her classes (don't tell her), and helped her in several projects.
In last year's Cannes Advertising Festival there was even (redundant) talks about viral advertising.
Viral advertising isn't created and cannot isn't conceived. Viral advertising are trends that were not placed, and that hust outbroke(?) of pure chance, due to mimic reflexions.
Viral advertising is someone putting a (random) image at a forum signature, just because, and that same signature (and the product/person that was linked to that) gets noticed and enters into the mainstream, the social environment and it's not controlled. This all happened not because it was planned (it wasn't), but it was a fluke.
I love the Wiki's article on this. Crap and poop.
A similar event occurs with memes, but it's very distinct. If you preemptively create something in order to achieve what viral advertising, then it's clearly not viral advertising because: cannot be created/cannot be controlled, it happened with no intention, due to chance and social interaction and mimics.
What you're trying to say could be buzz marketing, but what the heck.

I don't know where you got that from, but viral advertising is simply vague "buzz" that's planted by a marketing group for people to pick up on, decipher, and pass to their buddies. (Like a virus.) ILoveBees was viral marketing, as was Vanishing Point. As is this fake news.

Wikipedia
Viral marketing and viral advertising refer to marketing techniques that use preexisting social networks to produce increases in brand awareness, through self-replicating viral processes, analogous to the spread of pathological and computer viruses. It can be word-of-mouth delivered or enhanced by the network effects of the Internet.[1] Viral marketing is a marketing phenomenon that facilitates and encourages people to pass along a marketing message voluntarily.[2] Viral promotions may take the form of video clips, interactive Flash games, advergames, ebooks, brandable software, images, or even text messages.

(No, I don't care if you think Wiki's definition is crap (or poop, same thing.)

(_BeanZ_ said @ #1.10)
So all these advertising agencies claiming to specialise in Viral Marketing are mistaken/lying?

Lying, yes. It's very common, as long as you get the account... all is good, eh?

(GreyWolfSC said @ #1.11)
I don't know where you got that from, but viral advertising is simply vague "buzz" that's planted by a marketing group for people to pick up on, decipher, and pass to their buddies. (Like a virus.) ILoveBees was viral marketing, as was Vanishing Point. As is this fake news.

Viral advertising is not created by agencies. It's something that's brought up to fame(interest of search) by the community and all this due to social engagement. Random Joe puts an image in its LiveJournal, Random Jane,Bob,Courtney laugh, sage it, spread the word or hate it and spread against it. Random Joe was not advertising a product, or company. "Lol, (in whatever is going on in that picture), there's another one driving an old Lada in the back, ****ty car!", points out Random Bill in a comment - But what's a Lada? It's a russian(?) brand of cars (if it's still around). At that instance, people who never knew about Lada will snoop for it on a search engine; Lada lovers will bash on Bill, and Lada haters will charge back; interaction will boost with messages, hate/love pics, and another fun/hate 'target' and will eventually be forgotten. What you don't seem to follow is that with a picture about something funny that happened to someone, Lada gets free advertising, and considering that brands should spend 10 to 20% (or more) of its budget on advertising... Lada wins. With no involvement of agencies.
There's no product involved, nothing at all. It happened by a fluke and there's no one that says 'okay, this campaign is off', since: there's no agency and there's no campaign. It will be cast into oblivion when the community gets tired of it.
There's no little/vague buzz. There's *buzz* (agencies involved, planned, study the population, deliver and control [at some extension] the campaign and objects; and there's viral advertising, that is a trend or interest increased that occurs completely by random, via mimetics (social spread, community), many times with little related with what was posted, and cannot be controlled, at all.
Or you could just ask some 'advertising-subject-related' teacher.
Tired, **** happened, going to Member's Metropolis. See you.

(tiagosilva29 said @ #1.12)

Lying, yes. It's very common, as long as you get the account... all is good, eh?


Viral advertising is not created by agencies. It's something that's brought up to fame(interest of search) by the community and all this due to social engagement. Random Joe puts an image in its LiveJournal, Random Jane,Bob,Courtney laugh, sage it, spread the word or hate it and spread against it. Random Joe was not advertising a product, or company. "Lol, (in whatever is going on in that picture), there's another one driving an old Lada in the back, ****ty car!", points out Random Bill in a comment - But what's a Lada? It's a russian(?) brand of cars (if it's still around). At that instance, people who never knew about Lada will snoop for it on a search engine; Lada lovers will bash on Bill, and Lada haters will charge back; interaction will boost with messages, hate/love pics, and another fun/hate 'target' and will eventually be forgotten. What you don't seem to follow is that with a picture about something funny that happened to someone, Lada gets free advertising, and considering that brands should spend 10 to 20% (or more) of its budget on advertising... Lada wins. With no involvement of agencies.
There's no product involved, nothing at all. It happened by a fluke and there's no one that says 'okay, this campaign is off', since: there's no agency and there's no campaign. It will be cast into oblivion when the community gets tired of it.
There's no little/vague buzz. There's *buzz* (agencies involved, planned, study the population, deliver and control [at some extension] the campaign and objects; and there's viral advertising, that is a trend or interest increased that occurs completely by random, via mimetics (social spread, community), many times with little related with what was posted, and cannot be controlled, at all.
Or you could just ask some 'advertising-subject-related' teacher.
Tired, **** happened, going to Member's Metropolis. See you.

So you're saying that Vanishing Point and ILoveBees were created spontaneously out of thin air, not by Microsoft and 42 Entertaniment? (The companies that created these viral advertising campaigns...) I think you're confusing 'grassroots' advertising with viral.

(GreyWolfSC said @ #1.13)
So you're saying that Vanishing Point and ILoveBees were created spontaneously out of thin air, not by Microsoft and 42 Entertaniment? (The companies that created these viral advertising campaigns...) I think you're confusing 'grassroots' advertising with viral.

That's BUZZ marketing. Not Viral marketing.