Samsung issues global recall of Galaxy Note 7, replacement program announced

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 80
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,924member
    Honestly, Sammy should recall all its phones for being stolen designs. 
    biganantksundarampalominelostkiwijbdragon
  • Reply 42 of 80
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,924member
    gatorguy said:
    Samsung will probably be very busy trying to find out how to 'test for quality' if our Samsung refrigerator is anything to go by!  
    Mine too. So far in the past couple of years I've emptied it twice to turn it off and let the ice buildup behind the panel melt instead of locking up the fan and burning up the motor. I love the unit otherwise but that icing issue gives it a black-eye. No idea if that class-action suit ever went forward, and I've tried to look into it. 
    I believe many fridges/freezes do it. Mine does and it's a GE. I believe it's the lack of air flow is a packed freezer. 
  • Reply 43 of 80
    What would Apple do? 

    Deny, deny, dey. State that it only affect 0.000001% of products. 

    "Your charging it wrong". 

    A recall on your flagship? An unthinkable prospect from Apple. That's a fact. 
    Completely wrong.  iPhones never had a flaw that could seriously injure/kill people.  This is like a car recall.  Samsung had no choice.  If this was an issue with battery dying too quickly or something, samsung would've never done the recall or even admitted to the problem.
    palominejbdragonronnpscooter63
  • Reply 44 of 80
    misamisa Posts: 827member
    gatorguy said:
    While I don't particularly care for Samsung and their practices in this case they've handled it the way they should IMHO.  They got out in front of it, admitted almost immediately that there could be a problem rather than deny or misdirect.  Instead of delay they did the right thing and recalled the potentially affected units. Not up to "kudos to Samsung" levels but they certainly handled a bad situation responsibly.
    I am willing to stand corrected, but it seems to me the only substantive comment they've made so far is to blame suppliers. 

    Perhaps it's their design principles/processes and quality control that are at issue?
    Did you hear about how many factory deaths Samsung has "so far ignored"?

    Like there are multiple reasons to hate on Samsung, but I feel that it doesn't get quite enough hate since it holds exactly the same market-leading position in Korea as Apple does in the US (eg a leading manufacturer of popular stuff everyone has), but then again, every time I watch a K-drama I see LG stuff, not Samsung, while in the US television, you only ever see Apple stuff, or the brand is covered up.

    I think we hit a wall on the "thin and light" and everyone needs to clamp back down to their iPhone6S era sizes and either make it thicker or start shipping them with a silicone 12 hour "battery" bumper that is replaceable and charged independently, and when removed the phone still has 2-4 hours of charge. That way people won't destroy their phones and instead destroy the batteries alone.

    jbdragon
  • Reply 45 of 80
    bigbig Posts: 36member
    So, because it's not Apple there's no 'gate'? No 'batterygate'? No 'boomgate'?

    Well, due to this vacuum, I'll propose two:

    Product:

    Samsung Hot Pockets

    TV Drama:

    Halt and Catch Fire


    I don't have a Twitter account but if I did I would put this under #schadenfreude
    SpamSandwichnolamacguyjbdragon
  • Reply 46 of 80
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,825member
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    What would Apple do? 

    Deny, deny, dey. State that it only affect 0.000001% of products. 

    "Your charging it wrong". 

    A recall on your flagship? An unthinkable prospect from Apple. That's a fact. 
    nonsense. you're referring to the iPhone 4, and it was proven there was no issue -- from the AT&T dropped call data. Jobs also showed how death grips could affect attenuation of any internal antenna phone. further proof, they continued selling the exact same phone for years to come. 
    Actually Apple did soon change the antenna structure to avoid any repeat of possible iPhone 4 antenna issues in the original model. That's a fact. At the same time the issue certainly never rose to the level of being dangerous to users like the Note 7 is. At worst it was an inconvenience for a few folks. A recall wasn't justifiable. 
    that isn't what i said. yep of course they refined the design for the next-year's model -- every year's model improves the previous and is not noteworthy at all. but as you know these phones are at least 1-year out into design. meaning while today's new phone (ex: iPhone 7) is being released, the next year's (iPhone 2017) is already being designed. thus iterative improvement was not a response to the bogus controversy.

    the ultimate proof is that they continued to sell the original iPhone 4, the *exact* same design, for years after because there wasn't a problem -- as the carrier data proved. thus the story dropped off the news cycle.

    but you knew that.
    That's not what I was referring to. There were reports, including one from iFixit, that sometime mid-cycle Apple began adding a nonconductive coating to the metal band on the sides of the iPhone4 to fix the potential signal drop that might occur when the antennas halves were bridged. 

    ...and no I'm not accusing you of knowing that.  
    The stainless steel frame was likely given a passivation treatment to increase the dielectric of the surface, but there was no change to the antenna's, so i would consider it a minor tweak if it actually happened. To me it indicates that the iPhone 4 antenna design was fine, but Apple didn't get enough testing in the field which might have picked up the "grip" issue early. RF guys at Apple would have figured this out pretty quickly once it was a known issue; either way, antennagate went away. I would note that Apple took it's time, about a week, to figure out what the issue was before Jobs responded.

    iFixit attempted to determine this with a multimeter to check resistance of the frame, but since the measurement would have been at zero hz, not any of the working frequencies of the iPhone, it wouldn't have determined much. They aren't all that they purport to be.
    ericthehalfbeefastasleepronnpscooter63
  • Reply 47 of 80
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,513member
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    What would Apple do? 

    Deny, deny, dey. State that it only affect 0.000001% of products. 

    "Your charging it wrong". 

    A recall on your flagship? An unthinkable prospect from Apple. That's a fact. 
    nonsense. you're referring to the iPhone 4, and it was proven there was no issue -- from the AT&T dropped call data. Jobs also showed how death grips could affect attenuation of any internal antenna phone. further proof, they continued selling the exact same phone for years to come. 
    Actually Apple did soon change the antenna structure to avoid any repeat of possible iPhone 4 antenna issues in the original model. That's a fact. At the same time the issue certainly never rose to the level of being dangerous to users like the Note 7 is. At worst it was an inconvenience for a few folks. A recall wasn't justifiable. 
    that isn't what i said. yep of course they refined the design for the next-year's model -- every year's model improves the previous and is not noteworthy at all. but as you know these phones are at least 1-year out into design. meaning while today's new phone (ex: iPhone 7) is being released, the next year's (iPhone 2017) is already being designed. thus iterative improvement was not a response to the bogus controversy.

    the ultimate proof is that they continued to sell the original iPhone 4, the *exact* same design, for years after because there wasn't a problem -- as the carrier data proved. thus the story dropped off the news cycle.

    but you knew that.
    That's not what I was referring to. There were reports, including one from iFixit, that sometime mid-cycle Apple began adding a nonconductive coating to the metal band on the sides of the iPhone4 to fix the potential signal drop that might occur when the antennas halves were bridged. 

    ...and no I'm not accusing you of knowing that.  
    The stainless steel frame was likely given a passivation treatment to increase the dielectric of the surface, but there was no change to the antenna's, so i would consider it a minor tweak if it actually happened. To me it indicates that the iPhone 4 antenna design was fine, but Apple didn't get enough testing in the field which might have picked up the "grip" issue early. RF guys at Apple would have figured this out pretty quickly once it was a known issue; either way, antennagate went away. I would note that Apple took it's time, about a week, to figure out what the issue was before Jobs responded.

    iFixit attempted to determine this with a multimeter to check resistance of the frame, but since the measurement would have been at zero hz, not any of the working frequencies of the iPhone, it wouldn't have determined much. They aren't all that they purport to be.
    Note too that Apple did not repeat that antenna design with the 4S.
  • Reply 48 of 80
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    What would Apple do? 

    Deny, deny, dey. State that it only affect 0.000001% of products. 

    "Your charging it wrong". 

    A recall on your flagship? An unthinkable prospect from Apple. That's a fact. 
    nonsense. you're referring to the iPhone 4, and it was proven there was no issue -- from the AT&T dropped call data. Jobs also showed how death grips could affect attenuation of any internal antenna phone. further proof, they continued selling the exact same phone for years to come. 
    Actually Apple did soon change the antenna structure to avoid any repeat of possible iPhone 4 antenna issues in the original model. That's a fact. At the same time the issue certainly never rose to the level of being dangerous to users like the Note 7 is. At worst it was an inconvenience for a few folks. A recall wasn't justifiable. 
    that isn't what i said. yep of course they refined the design for the next-year's model -- every year's model improves the previous and is not noteworthy at all. but as you know these phones are at least 1-year out into design. meaning while today's new phone (ex: iPhone 7) is being released, the next year's (iPhone 2017) is already being designed. thus iterative improvement was not a response to the bogus controversy.

    the ultimate proof is that they continued to sell the original iPhone 4, the *exact* same design, for years after because there wasn't a problem -- as the carrier data proved. thus the story dropped off the news cycle.

    but you knew that.
    That's not all that I was referring to. There were reports, including one from iFixit, that sometime mid-cycle Apple began adding a nonconductive coating to the metal band on the sides of the iPhone4 to fix the potential signal drop that might occur when the antennas halves were bridged. 

    ...and no I'm not accusing you of knowing that.  
    reports, eh? 
    edited September 2016 ronn
  • Reply 49 of 80
    Older iPhone blows new Samsung away in speed testing (and this really matters), now fails smoke test. Typical Samsung junk. Looking forward to ordering a new iPhone next week.
    jbdragon
  • Reply 50 of 80
    gatorguy said:
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    What would Apple do? 

    Deny, deny, dey. State that it only affect 0.000001% of products. 

    "Your charging it wrong". 

    A recall on your flagship? An unthinkable prospect from Apple. That's a fact. 
    nonsense. you're referring to the iPhone 4, and it was proven there was no issue -- from the AT&T dropped call data. Jobs also showed how death grips could affect attenuation of any internal antenna phone. further proof, they continued selling the exact same phone for years to come. 
    Actually Apple did soon change the antenna structure to avoid any repeat of possible iPhone 4 antenna issues in the original model. That's a fact. At the same time the issue certainly never rose to the level of being dangerous to users like the Note 7 is. At worst it was an inconvenience for a few folks. A recall wasn't justifiable. 
    that isn't what i said. yep of course they refined the design for the next-year's model -- every year's model improves the previous and is not noteworthy at all. but as you know these phones are at least 1-year out into design. meaning while today's new phone (ex: iPhone 7) is being released, the next year's (iPhone 2017) is already being designed. thus iterative improvement was not a response to the bogus controversy.

    the ultimate proof is that they continued to sell the original iPhone 4, the *exact* same design, for years after because there wasn't a problem -- as the carrier data proved. thus the story dropped off the news cycle.

    but you knew that.
    That's not what I was referring to. There were reports, including one from iFixit, that sometime mid-cycle Apple began adding a nonconductive coating to the metal band on the sides of the iPhone4 to fix the potential signal drop that might occur when the antennas halves were bridged. 

    ...and no I'm not accusing you of knowing that.  
    The stainless steel frame was likely given a passivation treatment to increase the dielectric of the surface, but there was no change to the antenna's, so i would consider it a minor tweak if it actually happened. To me it indicates that the iPhone 4 antenna design was fine, but Apple didn't get enough testing in the field which might have picked up the "grip" issue early. RF guys at Apple would have figured this out pretty quickly once it was a known issue; either way, antennagate went away. I would note that Apple took it's time, about a week, to figure out what the issue was before Jobs responded.

    iFixit attempted to determine this with a multimeter to check resistance of the frame, but since the measurement would have been at zero hz, not any of the working frequencies of the iPhone, it wouldn't have determined much. They aren't all that they purport to be.
    Note too that Apple did not repeat that antenna design with the 4S.
    (what is w/ the comments not showing on AI...)

    each year's new phone is already being designed well *before* the new one hits the market, not after.

    but the carrier data showing insignificant differences in dropped calls, plus the fact they continued selling the regular 4 for years to come is all the proof that is really needed.
    jbdragon
  • Reply 51 of 80
    I bet in a few months, Samsung is going to announce record sales of the Galaxy Note 7. Samsung can now count replacements as being shipped (sold in Samsung's eyes). 
    lostkiwichiabadmonk
  • Reply 52 of 80
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,825member
    gatorguy said:
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    What would Apple do? 

    Deny, deny, dey. State that it only affect 0.000001% of products. 

    "Your charging it wrong". 

    A recall on your flagship? An unthinkable prospect from Apple. That's a fact. 
    nonsense. you're referring to the iPhone 4, and it was proven there was no issue -- from the AT&T dropped call data. Jobs also showed how death grips could affect attenuation of any internal antenna phone. further proof, they continued selling the exact same phone for years to come. 
    Actually Apple did soon change the antenna structure to avoid any repeat of possible iPhone 4 antenna issues in the original model. That's a fact. At the same time the issue certainly never rose to the level of being dangerous to users like the Note 7 is. At worst it was an inconvenience for a few folks. A recall wasn't justifiable. 
    that isn't what i said. yep of course they refined the design for the next-year's model -- every year's model improves the previous and is not noteworthy at all. but as you know these phones are at least 1-year out into design. meaning while today's new phone (ex: iPhone 7) is being released, the next year's (iPhone 2017) is already being designed. thus iterative improvement was not a response to the bogus controversy.

    the ultimate proof is that they continued to sell the original iPhone 4, the *exact* same design, for years after because there wasn't a problem -- as the carrier data proved. thus the story dropped off the news cycle.

    but you knew that.
    That's not what I was referring to. There were reports, including one from iFixit, that sometime mid-cycle Apple began adding a nonconductive coating to the metal band on the sides of the iPhone4 to fix the potential signal drop that might occur when the antennas halves were bridged. 

    ...and no I'm not accusing you of knowing that.  
    The stainless steel frame was likely given a passivation treatment to increase the dielectric of the surface, but there was no change to the antenna's, so i would consider it a minor tweak if it actually happened. To me it indicates that the iPhone 4 antenna design was fine, but Apple didn't get enough testing in the field which might have picked up the "grip" issue early. RF guys at Apple would have figured this out pretty quickly once it was a known issue; either way, antennagate went away. I would note that Apple took it's time, about a week, to figure out what the issue was before Jobs responded.

    iFixit attempted to determine this with a multimeter to check resistance of the frame, but since the measurement would have been at zero hz, not any of the working frequencies of the iPhone, it wouldn't have determined much. They aren't all that they purport to be.
    Note too that Apple did not repeat that antenna design with the 4S.
    No, Apple didn't repeat it, but Apple actually provided a pretty radical upgrade, likely beyond just solving the "antennagate" issue. It might have been in the works anyway, but likely if is was, got a boost from the controversy.

    from Jim Dalrymple:

    http://www.loopinsight.com/2011/10/11/review-iphone-4s/

    "Dual antennas

    The iPhone 4S has two antennas — one on the bottom and one at the top of the handset.

    Apple has given the iPhone the ability to intelligently switch between the antennas to ensure better call quality. The technology also allows this switching to go on during a phone call, so you won’t even notice that the switch has taken place.

    To be perfectly clear — this is an Apple-only technology. While other companies can receive on dual antennas, no other company can transmit and receive on dual GSM or CDMA antennas.

    The dual antennas are at work when you’re not on a call too. I have noticed that my signal is stronger in places where it was weak before.

    For many people, having this antenna technology will be well worth the upgrade, even without all the other features."

    ronn
  • Reply 53 of 80
    gatorguy said:
    I'm not aware of Samsung blaming suppliers. 

    Ah, from The Guardian:

    "Koh Dong-jin, president of Samsung’s mobile business, said on Friday, two weeks after the Note 7’s launch: “We have received several reports of battery explosions on the Note 7... and it has been confirmed that it was a battery cell problem. There was a tiny problem in the manufacturing process so it was very difficult to find out.”

    Koh refused to name the supplier of the faulty battery, but said that Note 7s sold in China used batteries from a different supplier and were unaffected. He said that Samsung was working with two or three different battery suppliers for the smartphone, including its own Samsung SDI."

    Oh boy... sure, they're not blaming suppliers... and no possibility that they themselves could be the problem... /s

    jbdragonronnpscooter63
  • Reply 54 of 80
    A recall on your flagship? An unthinkable prospect from Apple. That's a fact. 
    Yeah, because Apple isn’t retarded enough to release a defective product.

    And no, the 4 wasn’t defective.
    jbdragonpscooter63
  • Reply 55 of 80
    ronmgronmg Posts: 163member
    Samdung, I'd like to introduce you to Karma. Karma, meet Samdung.
    jbdragon
  • Reply 56 of 80
    What would Apple do? 

    Deny, deny, dey. State that it only affect 0.000001% of products. 

    "Your charging it wrong". 

    A recall on your flagship? An unthinkable prospect from Apple. That's a fact. 

    And your point? 
  • Reply 57 of 80
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,513member
    gatorguy said:
    I'm not aware of Samsung blaming suppliers. 

    Hmm, from The Guardian:

    "Koh Dong-jin, president of Samsung’s mobile business, said on Friday, two weeks after the Note 7’s launch: “We have received several reports of battery explosions on the Note 7... and it has been confirmed that it was a battery cell problem. There was a tiny problem in the manufacturing process so it was very difficult to find out.”

    Koh refused to name the supplier of the faulty battery, but said that Note 7s sold in China used batteries from a different supplier and were unaffected. He said that Samsung was working with two or three different battery suppliers for the smartphone, including its own Samsung SDI."

    Oh, you consider that blaming someone else? Sounds like they're identifying where the problem is and which regions are affected. Sounds like what most companies do, tell users what the issue is.

     I think you're trying to read something there that isn't.  
    edited September 2016 singularity
  • Reply 58 of 80
    512ke512ke Posts: 782member
    Thank God it wasn't Amazon that had this massive screwup. Can you imagine? The Amazon Kindle that actually burns? The Amazon Fire that catches on fire. They'd never live it down. 
    chiajbdragonbadmonk
  • Reply 59 of 80
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    I'm not aware of Samsung blaming suppliers. 

    Hmm, from The Guardian:

    "Koh Dong-jin, president of Samsung’s mobile business, said on Friday, two weeks after the Note 7’s launch: “We have received several reports of battery explosions on the Note 7... and it has been confirmed that it was a battery cell problem. There was a tiny problem in the manufacturing process so it was very difficult to find out.”

    Koh refused to name the supplier of the faulty battery, but said that Note 7s sold in China used batteries from a different supplier and were unaffected. He said that Samsung was working with two or three different battery suppliers for the smartphone, including its own Samsung SDI."

    Oh, you consider that blaming someone else? Sounds like they're identifying where the problem is and which regions are affected. Sounds like what most companies do, tell users what the issue is.

     I think you're trying to read something there that isn't.  
    Two words (well, one word and one acronym) for you: Samsung SDI.
    edited September 2016
  • Reply 60 of 80
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,513member
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    I'm not aware of Samsung blaming suppliers. 

    Hmm, from The Guardian:

    "Koh Dong-jin, president of Samsung’s mobile business, said on Friday, two weeks after the Note 7’s launch: “We have received several reports of battery explosions on the Note 7... and it has been confirmed that it was a battery cell problem. There was a tiny problem in the manufacturing process so it was very difficult to find out.”

    Koh refused to name the supplier of the faulty battery, but said that Note 7s sold in China used batteries from a different supplier and were unaffected. He said that Samsung was working with two or three different battery suppliers for the smartphone, including its own Samsung SDI."

    Oh, you consider that blaming someone else? Sounds like they're identifying where the problem is and which regions are affected. Sounds like what most companies do, tell users what the issue is.

     I think you're trying to read something there that isn't.  
    Two words (well, one word and one acronym) for you: Samsung SDI.
    Yeah, that's what Samsung said which sure sounds like they're accepting responsibility. Afterall they pointed out they supplied some of the batteries themselves which if they were trying to pass the buck they would not have, right? 
    singularity
Sign In or Register to comment.