So, like, now I have to wait for my iPad 2?

THREE people were killed and 15 hurt in a factory that makes Apple parts. But come on, what's the real issue here?

Foxconn

THREE people were killed and 15 injured at an explosion in a factory that makes Apple parts last week.

Now what everyone wants to know is - how long do I have to wait for an iPad 2?

Or, even more distressingly - will Apple be okay?

At least, that's what a glance at some of the headlines coming from a mix of financial and technology news services might lead you to think.

It took just two paragraphs of brief backgrounding before the Financial Times got to what it obviously felt was the real issue when it reported that "local media said production could resume at the Taiwanese-owned factory as early as this week".

Because, folks, this isn't just any old factory. This is the factory that makes parts for what Apple calls the "world's most magical device".

Or more specifically, polishes them, the dust from which process is what is suspected to have fuelled the explosion.

Hence FT's headline "What the Foxconn explosion means for Apple".

To be fair, most outlets couldn't help dealing with the "what it means for Apple" line - news.com.au included - but way, way down the page. But when concerns for Apple's wellbeing are added to headline and leads, expect criticism to follow.

Despite being a tech site, Gizmodo was concerned that the explosion "potentially injures Apple's Bottom-Line".

It reported that the "best-case scenario for Apple in this tragedy is if it turns out the majority of iPads produced by Foxconn are made at their Shenzhen plant".

Some might say another best-case scenario would be that none of the survivors take a turn for the worse and die, as a third did soon after Gizmodo's story was posted.

Being a finance news service, FT kept a close watch on the share market for evidence of just how much iPad 2 production had shifted to Chengdu.

It claimed that the fact that Apple shares only dipped slightly might be a clue as to exactly what kind of impact the explosion might have on shortening those queues around the block for the $580-$950 boredom killer.

The source of the shift in focus from how many workers died to to how many people will miss out on iPads can be attributed to an RBC analyst who specialises in Apple named Mike Abramsky.

Mr Abramsky released a note on Friday immediately after the explosion claiming the plant stoppage could see between 1.8m and 2.8m tablet-fondlers miss out on an iPad 2 in the financial third (June-Sept) quarter.

That tidbit gave media services the world over all the information they needed to turn a Foxconn - which also, by the way, makes parts for Amazon, Nintendo, Intel, Microsoft, Nokia, Acer and Sony - story into a hit-attracting Apple story.

Forbes gave a detailed explanation of Mr Abramsky's analysis of what the explosion means (for those not married to/fathered by the three dead workers), under the headlines "Serious Business Impact" and "Less Serious Business Impact".

A "Serious Business Impact" would mean "Chengdu manufactures most iPads and the explosion is serious." Ouch.

A "Less Serious Business Impact" would mean "a 1 month production impact, would perhaps equate to

So the consensus seems to be not too bad after all. For those not married to/fathered by the three dead workers.

Bloomberg summed up Apple fanboi fears with "Foxconn faces limited impact from fire".

It quoted two Chinese experts who claimed most of the iPhone and iPad parts were made in Shenzhen.

"The Chengdu plant is primarily for computer assembly and the iPad assembly is being pilot run," head of Greater China technology research at Yuanta Securities Co Vincent Chen told Bloomberg.

"Foxconn is a very professional manufacturer and is very experienced in making adjustment in times of crisis, and the impact should be very minimal."

So that's two "phews" to one "ouch" for those tossing up which model/data plan suits them best this quarter.

Or, if you're married to/fathered by a Foxconn Chengdu worker, two "phews" to 18 "ouches", which isn't so good for anyone trying to turn this into an Apple story.

It's all about perspective, really.