Galaxy Note 7 investigation concludes, pair of issues will cost Samsung $5 billion

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 40
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    So they designed a faulty phone so when component manufacturers followed the design they made a hazardous explosive device. Got it. 
    irelandwatto_cobra
  • Reply 22 of 40
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,385member
    Court system, meet karma, the ultimate arbiter.  
    Yep, I now don't feel as bad that Samsung did not pay up, they suffered in an even worse way.

    PS- Congrats for becoming a mod! You're one of the best posters on this board from what I've seen, so hopefully you'll have some kind of influence in cleaning up this place from trolls. 
    fracStrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 23 of 40
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 12,936member
    dewme said:
    Gotta give them credit for bringing independent test agencies like UL and TUV to assess the cause of the specific failure. However, they should also follow through with these same agencies to ensure that their development, testing, and safety/risk assessment processes they have in place meet industry acceptable standards so similar issues that put customers and the general public at great risk do not crop up again in the future.
    Give them credit? There are announcements on every single flight that their product is a life threatening risk to the safety of the entire flight -- this is a potentially brand killing screw up, of course they're going to call in all resources to attempt to resolve. There's nothing unusual or admirable going on. 
    edited January 2017 radarthekatwatto_cobra
  • Reply 24 of 40
    cali said:
    Lol! Awesome! I love seeing karma slap thieves in the face!

    "Over $5 billion"
    Since Samsung likes to under exagerate their bad numbers(and over exaggerate good) I see this being even higher. $6 billion?
    Although all negative Points are true  (rushed release, not enough testing of the components and ultimately losing a lot of consumer's trust) there's no excuse for taking this situation as "karma". 

    The fact that the people who bought this phone were dangerously exposed to an explosive threat is neither "lol" nor "awesome". 

    There's still humans working at Samsung, like you and me, who tried to deliver a functioning and secure product. Yet you state this is Samsungs negative karma. Did the people who bought the phone deserve  being exposed to a safety threat? Did they deserve negative karma too? You should consider those questions before posting such an ignorant and immature comment. 

    Pretty sure the references to karma, itself just a catch-all for the balancing of justice, were, in all cases, referring to merely the entity that is Samsung. The same entity that was dragged into court by Apple. That entity did not refer to any of the specific workers on the production lines or the customers who bought Samsung phones, and neither does this reference to Samsung in the context of karma working against it. I think you're taking the whole attitude of the posters far too seriously. Nobody here is wishing ill on Samsung employees or customers.
    I don't think that I am taking the attitudes too seriously. I stated my point pretty clearly and I obviously don't agree with you. I have to honestly tell you that I don't understand your comment 100% as I'm not a native speaker and you used rather advanced language to make your point, but I can still read the wording of the comment I quoted and it is very hard for me to See the words "Lol! Awesome! I love seeing karma slap thieves in the face!" the way you do. Since your comment is entirely based on assumptions (like mine), I am curious for an answer of the original poster. As I don't expect my personal opinion to be regarded as a general standard, I am open minded to further explanation of the original poster, that may let me see this situation differently, although I still stand behind my opinion according to the comment I quoted. 
    edited January 2017
  • Reply 25 of 40
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 12,936member
    Soli said:
    I'm starting to believe in karma.
    Why? Because the people who bought the phone deserved being exposed to a safety threat because they deserved the negative karma too?

    You don't get the concept of karma at all, which is why you should not start believing in it. 
    Considering that it's all make believe anyway, i don't think it matters much either way. 

    Samsung is a shady company that makes poor, unethical decisions, and this time it caught up with them. And they took with them those saps who bought their product. Which is exactly why consumer protection laws exist. 
    edited January 2017 netmageradarthekatwatto_cobra
  • Reply 26 of 40
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,357member
    Soli said:
    I'm starting to believe in karma.
    Why? Because the people who bought the phone deserved being exposed to a safety threat because they deserved the negative karma too?

    You don't get the concept of karma at all, which is why you should not start believing in it. 
    Considering that it's all make believe anyway, i don't think it matters much either way. 

    Samsung is a shady company that makes poor, unethical decisions, and this time it caught up with them. And they took with them those saps who bought their product. Which is exactly why consumer protection laws exist. 
    I'm not a superstitious person, but I do believe Karma is real. Steve Jobs too likely believed in it. Our grandparents believed in it too, just referring to it differently: You reap what you sow.
    edited January 2017
  • Reply 27 of 40
    brucemcbrucemc Posts: 1,541member
    foggyhill said:
    cali said:
    Lol! Awesome! I love seeing karma slap thieves in the face!

    "Over $5 billion"
    Since Samsung likes to under exagerate their bad numbers(and over exaggerate good) I see this being even higher. $6 billion?
    If you count future earnings and loss of reputation, the loss is likely more like $10B, so it's a massive clusterfuck.

    I don't know. People tend to forget pretty soon, or be pretty forgiving. If Samsung foregoes the "Note" brand and names the devices something else, I'd be very surprised.

    I don't think they'll sell any less than what they did with the Note 7 before they started exploding. Samsung may have a snazzy ad campaign and could possibly bait a lot of people again.

    Tech-savvy Android users may have shifted to the Pixel, but that's about it.

    Samsung's brand may have suffered some, but the commentariat doesn't seem to think it much.  How that could be is questionable - though perhaps it means that Samsung's "brand" wasn't that valuable to begin with. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 28 of 40
    linkmanlinkman Posts: 1,036member
    sennen said:
    "At a press conference on Monday, Samsung officials said exhaustive tests on tens of thousands of devices and batteries had ruled out any problems with the device’s hardware or software."
    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jan/23/samsung-blames-faulty-batteries-for-causing-galaxy-note-7-fires

    Hmm. The battery is not part of the device's hardware?
    Are you unfamiliar with marketing-speak and corporate damage control trying to obfuscate things?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 29 of 40
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,038member
    linkman said:
    sennen said:
    "At a press conference on Monday, Samsung officials said exhaustive tests on tens of thousands of devices and batteries had ruled out any problems with the device’s hardware or software."
    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jan/23/samsung-blames-faulty-batteries-for-causing-galaxy-note-7-fires

    Hmm. The battery is not part of the device's hardware?
    Are you unfamiliar with marketing-speak and corporate damage control trying to obfuscate things?
    Of course he has, but saying it's not a problem with HW (to wit, a physical aspect of the device) could open themselves to other issues. I can't see Apple saying that a physical issue isn't a HW problem because it would likely mean Apple getting sued for minimizing and lying about an issue.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 30 of 40
    jbdragonjbdragon Posts: 2,311member
    simply258 said:
    I wonder if they'll re-release the Note7 at a lower price point while selling the Note8 as the latest and greatest. They still sell the Note5 so it's been done.
    The Note 7 is DEAD. It's never coming back. It's to be forgotten. It's a new day with the Note 8. The last thing they want to do is give people a reminder of the Note 7 when trying to sell the Note 8.
  • Reply 31 of 40
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,557member
    ireland said:
    $5B? For me the brand is permanently damaged. Only a fool would trust Samsung again after this.
    There are billions of fools on this planet so...
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 32 of 40
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 12,936member
    gatorguy said:
    Soli said:
    I'm starting to believe in karma.
    Why? Because the people who bought the phone deserved being exposed to a safety threat because they deserved the negative karma too?

    You don't get the concept of karma at all, which is why you should not start believing in it. 
    Considering that it's all make believe anyway, i don't think it matters much either way. 

    Samsung is a shady company that makes poor, unethical decisions, and this time it caught up with them. And they took with them those saps who bought their product. Which is exactly why consumer protection laws exist. 
    I'm not a superstitious person, but I do believe Karma is real. Steve Jobs too likely believed in it. Our grandparents believed in it too, just referring to it differently: You reap what you sow.
    With all due respect, if you believe in a mystic force that renders justice to human beings on earth, then yes, you are a superstitious person. 

    "Reaping what you sow" as a phrase is really just a confirmation bias observation. If a guy is a jerk and makes decisions that harm other people but benefit himself, but finally experiences woe  himself, one may say "Ha! You reap what you sow!" But, if nothing happens to him, nobody says that. Thus just like other signs of miracles and various mystic woo, it's just confirmation bias.

    This is because it's a human invention. Animals in the wild don't think they experience karma, because they can't conceptualize the idea of karma. To borrow a line from Split -- "You are what you believe".
    edited January 2017 radarthekatSoliwatto_cobra
  • Reply 33 of 40
    So they delay need more time to investigate how the iPhone can squeeze in a battery but we can't.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 34 of 40
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 3,867moderator
    gatorguy said:
    Soli said:
    I'm starting to believe in karma.
    Why? Because the people who bought the phone deserved being exposed to a safety threat because they deserved the negative karma too?

    You don't get the concept of karma at all, which is why you should not start believing in it. 
    Considering that it's all make believe anyway, i don't think it matters much either way. 

    Samsung is a shady company that makes poor, unethical decisions, and this time it caught up with them. And they took with them those saps who bought their product. Which is exactly why consumer protection laws exist. 
    I'm not a superstitious person, but I do believe Karma is real. Steve Jobs too likely believed in it. Our grandparents believed in it too, just referring to it differently: You reap what you sow.
    Be careful not to fall too far down the rabbit hole of humanity's fictional realities.  Here's a great TED talk that'll put things into the proper perspective.  

    https://www.ted.com/talks/yuval_noah_harari_what_explains_the_rise_of_humans
  • Reply 35 of 40
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,038member
    gatorguy said:
    Soli said:
    I'm starting to believe in karma.
    Why? Because the people who bought the phone deserved being exposed to a safety threat because they deserved the negative karma too?

    You don't get the concept of karma at all, which is why you should not start believing in it. 
    Considering that it's all make believe anyway, i don't think it matters much either way. 

    Samsung is a shady company that makes poor, unethical decisions, and this time it caught up with them. And they took with them those saps who bought their product. Which is exactly why consumer protection laws exist. 
    I'm not a superstitious person, but I do believe Karma is real. Steve Jobs too likely believed in it. Our grandparents believed in it too, just referring to it differently: You reap what you sow.
    1) StrangeDays is correct. You can't believe in the supernatural and not be superstitious.

    2) There is no direct correlation that you reap what you sow. If you steal $100 there is no verifiable cosmic force that will take that $100 from you. You can look at the most destructive people throughout history to see that this is not the case. You could argue that justice will get served in the next life, which goes hand-in-hand with the religion in which karma was first invented, but since this still falls under an unverifiable belief system you'd still have to believe in something beyond the natural world to say it exists.
    radarthekat
  • Reply 36 of 40
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,038member
    Soli said:
    I'm starting to believe in karma.
    Why? Because the people who bought the phone deserved being exposed to a safety threat because they deserved the negative karma too?

    You don't get the concept of karma at all, which is why you should not start believing in it. 
    1) Considering the mechanics of karma, who are you to say that having a Samsung phone explode in their face isn't fate for their past actions.

    2) The article is about what it will cost Samsung, which is fitting since they've cost so many other vendors billions…. and it was said a joke.
    edited January 2017 watto_cobra
  • Reply 37 of 40
    Soli said:
    Soli said:
    I'm starting to believe in karma.
    Why? Because the people who bought the phone deserved being exposed to a safety threat because they deserved the negative karma too?

    You don't get the concept of karma at all, which is why you should not start believing in it. 
    1) Considering the mechanics of karma, who are you to say that having a Samsung phone explode in their face isn't fate for their past actions.

    2) The article is about what it will cost Samsung, which is fitting since they've cost so many other vendors billions…. and it was said a joke.
    1) I didn't say that. 
    edited January 2017
  • Reply 38 of 40
    sog35 said:
    cali said:
    Lol! Awesome! I love seeing karma slap thieves in the face!

    "Over $5 billion"
    Since Samsung likes to under exagerate their bad numbers(and over exaggerate good) I see this being even higher. $6 billion?
    Although all negative Points are true  (rushed release, not enough testing of the components and ultimately losing a lot of consumer's trust) there's no excuse for taking this situation as "karma". 

    The fact that the people who bought this phone were dangerously exposed to an explosive threat is neither "lol" nor "awesome". 

    There's still humans working at Samsung, like you and me, who tried to deliver a functioning and secure product. Yet you state this is Samsungs negative karma. Did the people who bought the phone deserve  being exposed to a safety threat? Did they deserve negative karma too? You should consider those questions before posting such an ignorant and immature comment. 

    Their fault for buying a phone from a morally bankrupt company.
    No. 

    Edit: Oh and you forgot the word "bullsh*t" in your so called statement. ;) 
    edited January 2017
  • Reply 39 of 40
    Soli said:
    I'm starting to believe in karma.
    Why? Because the people who bought the phone deserved being exposed to a safety threat because they deserved the negative karma too?

    You don't get the concept of karma at all, which is why you should not start believing in it. 
    Considering that it's all make believe anyway, i don't think it matters much either way. 

    Samsung is a shady company that makes poor, unethical decisions, and this time it caught up with them. And they took with them those saps who bought their product. Which is exactly why consumer protection laws exist. 
    Since you haven't referred to my questions or the meaning of what I've written at all I don't have to say anything to you except that if
    "Considering that it's all make believe anyway, i don't think it matters much either way."
    is true, then you shouldn't have posted your first comment in the first place. 
Sign In or Register to comment.