mnbob1

Nintendo Mario game on iOS exclusive for a period of time? It will be one of the best selling if not the all time best selling game on the App Store ever. Mario is the most popular Nintendo character and part of the reason that they have been able to stay in business. If they need a constant internet connection to protect this game from piracy then it makes sense to do it. The cost of the game is not high and I would personally pay double that for it.

Bringing it to Android I'm sure has some technical issues with piracy and is causing the delay. That and the differences if hardware and iterations of Android between device makers. Just imagine if they only released it for Sony phones only in order to keep it under control! Or only one model of Samsung Galaxy phone. That's the only way they might be able to lock it down. Also Android users have been reported to be less inclined to spend as much money on apps as iOS users.

redraider11 said:

Real time re-routing around traffic is a must in order for me to even begin to think about switching from Waze. 

You need to use the Apple Maps app when it gets a major update. This feature is included in the latest version. When I started using the beta versions of it it worked very similar to Waze and attemptsed to send me to side streets that I was familiar with and knew weren't going to make my time faster because of traffic lights. The release version is more conservative and I think has been more useful. Give it a try before you pass judgement and always check before assuming that Apple isn't adding new features. 

It's inconceivable that a corporation as large as Samsung with a "crew of "hundreds of employees" working on the problem" couldn't replicate the issue and be 100% sure of the fix before sending out replacement units to customers. The speed that the replacement units became available would indicate to me that the systems with replaced batteries were already in the supply chain so the decision my upper management to make the call for a "battery issue" was based on the costs involved. Oops wrong choice! Not only have they had to scrap one of their flagship products that was supposed to be an iPhone 7 Plus killer but the costs to dump the current inventory and redesign the product as well as refund all of the units that were sold. On top of that there will probably be lawsuits from customers that they will be better off settling out of court. As it says in the article the tarnish to their brand is hard to put a cost to right now. Since Samsung has always been a media darling the damage may be minimal. However the press can be fickle and they might jump ship to Google. Some have already.

It doesn't take long for a ship to sink. This isn't like holding the phone in the wrong way, or the beta version of Apple Maps, or BendGate (which never existed). Fortunately for Samsung they have some very loyal customers.

wizard69 said:

dewme said:

This is a black eye on the CPSC. They should have insisted that Samsung provide sufficient peer reviewed evidence from the root cause failure mode analysis of the first round of defective exploding phones and the prescribed modifications before allowing the now possibly defective replacement phones to be imported. The speed at which Samsung was able to deliver the supposed "fixed" products into the sales channel leads me to believe that consumer safety is being short circuited for reasons known only to the CPSC and Samsung. Someone's not doing their job and consumer health and public safety is being compromised. Totally Unacceptable.

Sadly the only thing the CPSC people are doing is pushing a leftist agenda. Like many federal departments they have lost their way over the last decade or so. 

 Right wing nonsense! Don't blame the CPSC for SAMSUNG's mess! Most likely the CPSC has a budget that has continually been decreased by the Republican controlled house of representatives and the filibustering senate. Neither of them have been able to agree on a true budget in the last decade and see no problem with across the board cuts that make no sense. I'm hoping the next eight years could be better but based on our choices for candidates I'm going to think the worst and then be pleasantly surprised when it's not that bad. (I can think up some pretty bad stuff.)

eightzero said:

René de Kat said:

What about not shooting to kill, but incapacitating the suspect like we do in Europe and other civilised countries? That way you can interrogate someone and not making assumptions about someone being a terrorist. I am always surprised with how trigger happy USA police officers are without actually using that grey matter.

Please describe your expertise in this area. You've firearms training? Interrogation/ intelligence gathering experience? Or perhaps a civil rights advocate with data gleaned from extensive research? Do please continue to persuade us about your conclusions on the subject. We barbarians in the USA wish to know more.

I was born and raised here in the United States. In fact I live only about 40 miles from where this attack occurred. I live 4 miles from the Mall of America which is supposed to be on the top terrorism target list. I work at Target Field during Twins games (no jokes please) I am always aware of what's going on around me at all times.

 I think Rene had a valid point but it came across a bit snobbish. Our law enforcement does tend to shoot to kill perhaps more often than necessary. This guy had a knife. Why couldn't he be taken down by means other than deadly force?  We are so afraid of terroism that shoot to kill is the way we handle these situations. If the suspect were taken alive we would be able to learn so much more than anything on their iPhone.