Samsung testing confirms battery problems to blame for Galaxy Note 7 fires

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 29
    linkmanlinkman Posts: 1,028member
    cali said:
    I'm still waiting for the iPod killer myself. :)
    That was the Zune, correct?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 22 of 29
    linkmanlinkman Posts: 1,028member
    tshapi said:
    The issue isn't the battery specifically. I said this before. 1) Apple underclocks everything. Samsung most likely does not. 2) the problem is probably with the battery specifically the quick charge ability. 3) of Samsung recreated this issue. Why not release a remedy so those who still have note 7's can continue to use with out any more issues 
    Please reread the first line of the article (below for your convenience). If the report is correct then it's absolutely a problem with the battery. There is rarely a software fix for hardware problems, especially when things catch on fire. Don't you believe Samsung would have issued a software fix for the quick charge (I'm sure they tried that very early in the investigation) and offered that option to those that would have taken it instead of issuing a complete recall? It would have saved them something like $3+ billion.

    AppleInsider said:
    Internally, Samsung has concluded that the battery -- and not any faults in software, or other hardware -- was reportedly to blame for the fires that led to the recall and ultimate cancellation of the Galaxy Note 7.


  • Reply 23 of 29
    dachardachar Posts: 330member
    Soli said:

    NARRATOR: "A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one."

    I like your quote but I wonder if it is missing a key item, being the value of lost sales in the future due to damaged reputation? My 2 year old car had a recall. It has a new engine design of 1.5 litres with three cylinders. The company has found excessive wear of a part of the cam and has chosen to replace it at their cost. I estimate this has cost the car company about 2,000 pounds including car hire costs for 7 weeks, labour and parts. It is a premium brand car maker. They have done this to protect the value of the brand. I suspect if they had used your formula and ignored the potential loss of value to their reputation they may have not recalled the car. 
  • Reply 24 of 29
    sog35 said:
    BULLSHIT

    They changed the battery and it still blew up.
    Samsung management uses a false sense of urgency to drive workers.

    Think Stephen Elop's "burning platform" memo, but used again and again and again, and combined with arbitrary & unrealistic targets and shaved timelines.

    Something like the Note 7 fires was a) inevitable and b) going to happen almost all all the time, just not necessarily such a major safety issue. They were basically trying to win a race by only using the accelerator, except the race was Paris-Dakar, not NASCAR.


  • Reply 25 of 29
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 3,509moderator
    Simple way to back their claim that it was solely the battery.  Samsung should sue the battery manufacturers to recoup losses.  Then the battery manufacturers will, through a rigid process of legal discovery, attempt to determine and show the court that the fault was not due to the battery design but lay elsewhere.  If Samsung is confident in their claims, then we should see such lawsuits come to court.  My money says this will not happen, and lack of any lawsuits being filed would be enough evidence to suggest its not the batteries and that Samsung intends to cover up their engineering failures. 
    edited January 2017
  • Reply 26 of 29
     cali said:
    I'm still waiting for the iPod killer myself. :)


    What??? You don't have the iPhone yet?? ;)


  • Reply 27 of 29
    this is a B.S. non-conclusion conclusion to the problems. No kidding it was the battery, but it was THEIR implementation of the battery - charging, packaging that caused the fires. The statement is barely more than oxygen as being the cause of the fires.
  • Reply 28 of 29
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member
    Simple way to back their claim that it was solely the battery.  Samsung should sue the battery manufacturers to recoup losses.  Then the battery manufacturers will, through a rigid process of legal discovery, attempt to determine and show the court that the fault was not due to the battery design but lay elsewhere.  If Samsung is confident in their claims, then we should see such lawsuits come to court.  My money says this will not happen, and lack of any lawsuits being filed would be enough evidence to suggest its not the batteries and that Samsung intends to cover up their engineering failures. 
    Those battery manufacturers have tight relationships with Samsung; I think they'll just take the hit, be the fall guys (and probably get a backdoor payout on their next contract) and not rock the boat.

    It will be better for Samsung and those manufacturers that way.
Sign In or Register to comment.