Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
AT&T Considering Halting All Samsung Galaxy Note 7 Sales and Replacements
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's the lawsuit that caused many Apple fanatics to hate Samsung. Like I said before, it's like some weird Us vs Them Manson like mind control. When I see people on here virtually high 5ing each other whenever something happens to Samsung, I can't help but shake my head. Again, it's comical and also sad. It's ok to make fun of Samsung but had this been Apple...the Apple defense would've been strong. "You're making fun of Apple? This is a serious issue. You need to grow up" Yeah...like I said, let's keep it classy. You never know what may come Apple's way a year or so from now
This is good and bad for Apple. If there is a very high influx of customers transitioning from Samsung to Apple, Apple might not be able to handle it from a customer service standpoint. To many people not enough employees to handle the support calls and visits to the Apple Store.
Fake.
The lady used a sharp object to hit her Note 7. A professional testing company from Switzerland, SGS, confirmed that it was the lady that did it.
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Alle...o-spend-extra-cash-on-3rd-party-tests_id86136
Samsung, as all corrupt corporate companies, particularly pharmaceuticals and certain car brands, follow a simple equation:
A. If lawsuit costs + brand reputation damage > recall costs + company profit = Withdraw product line
B. If lawsuit costs + brand reputation < recall costs + company profit = continue selling product line, recall faulty products
Lawsuit costs are made up of an estimate of paying out for damages including customer deaths.
I despise corporate greed and chasing shareholder value at all costs including safety of customers.
Samsung are the epitome of this and have ridden apples coat tails for way too long with minimal respite.
As the above equation dictates the cost of Samsung legal payouts for Apple patent infringements is less than the profit margin they make. So they continue to copy apple whilst at the same time maintaining they are more innovative. It's easy for someone to expand on innovation that they have stolen from another company who have already spent serious dollars r and d'ing - and then saying you innovate more than them.
A. If lawsuit costs + brand reputation damage > recall costs + company profit = Withdraw product line
B. If lawsuit costs + brand reputation < recall costs + company profit = continue selling product line, recall faulty products
Lawsuit costs are made up of an estimate of paying out for damages including customer deaths.
I despise corporate greed and chasing shareholder value at all costs including safety of customers.
Samsung are the epitome of this and have ridden apples coat tails for way too long with minimal respite.
As the above equation dictates the cost of Samsung legal payouts for Apple patent infringements is less than the profit margin they make. So they continue to copy apple whilst at the same time maintaining they are more innovative. It's easy for someone to expand on innovation that they have stolen from another company who have already spent serious dollars r and d'ing - and then saying you innovate more than them.
Sadly another report coming out of Taiwan of a young lady whose replacement Note 7 began burning up in her back pocket.
http://www.appledaily.com.tw/realtimenews/article/local/20161008/964168
English translation http://focustaiwan.tw/news/asoc/201610080009.aspx
"Taipei, Oct. 8 (CNA) A replacement model of the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 smartphone exploded in Taiwan on Friday while its user was walking her dog in a park, local newspaper Apple Daily reported on Saturday.
According to the report, a 26-year-old woman surnamed Lai was walking her dog in a park in Taipei when she realized smoke was spewing from her replacement Note 7, which Lai said she had picked up just 10 days ago.
Lai said she quickly pulled the phone from her jeans pocket and threw it on the ground, then waited until the smoke cleared before picking the phone up and taking it back to her workplace in her phone case, the report said.
Apple Daily cited the woman as saying that she heard a "bang" before feeling heat on her buttocks and seeing a lot of white smoke billowing from the phone after taking it out of her pocket.
The woman said she purchased a Galaxy Note 7 in August this year, and exchanged the phone for a replacement model on Sept. 27 after seeing TV reports suggesting that the Note 7 could explode, according to the article.
In a statement issued Saturday, Samsung Taiwan said it was trying to reach the customer and hoped to recall the product and further clarify the cause of the incident.
It said it could not confirm if the phone was a replacement model without looking into the matter.
The incident came just two days after an alleged replacement model of the Note 7 began smoking aboard a Southwest Airlines in the United States on Wednesday, leading the airline to evacuate passengers on the plane.
Taiwan's Consumers' Foundation urged Samsung Taiwan on Saturday to suspend all sales and replacements of the new Galaxy Note 7, because continuing to distribute the model would be like "sending bombs to consumers."
(By Christie Chen and Yang Shu-min)"
____________________
Whether after investigation this turns out to be legit or not, the continued plague of these reports can only serve to fuse the Note 7 with the stigma/label of the "burning up phone" further into peoples conscience.
Very bad luck for that lady bit look at that Gorilla Glass, not a crack I can see
Very bad luck for that lady bit look at that Gorilla Glass, not a crack I can see
Lol. That's definitely looking for a silver cloud
Had this been Apple the Android defense force would be here in full swing.
As it stands some of the usual suspects are missing in action.
Wonder why.
This is an Apple fan-site.
Get over it.
You must not run a company, or you did...one time...but never again.
A professional testing company? The branch of SGS tested the phone was one of the former Samsung's R&D facilities. Samsung sold the division to SGS but employees and facilities are still located in Samsung campus. Isn't it funny?
As Milton Friedman once opined, how much extra should a company spend to make sure their product never produces harm? $1? $1000? $1,000,000? This isn't necessarily greed - it's economic reality. Even governments are forced to place a dollar value on a human being's life, otherwise it becomes untenable to ever deliver a product or service to people. I'm not going to claim that Samsung's specific decisions with the Note 7 were reasonable in this regard. Just trying to inject some reality into your thinking. Here's a video of Milton Friedman explaining this concept:
On the other hand, if a Note 7 phone held by a passenger or put into hold by a customer caught fire, and that passenger had been told not to do this, how deep in trouble would that passenger be? You'd have to be an almighty idiot to take one of those phones with you on board of a plane.
A company should spend whatever it takes to make sure a life is not lost. I'm referring mainly to pharmaceutical companies who falsify clinical trial testing to push drugs past the fda. Happens a lot.
I do understand your point re this Samsung case, however if a member of your family were to succumb to a Samsung related injury or worse, I suspect friedman's theories will fall upon deaf ear
They are not spontaneously combusting. Reports are that one supplier produced batteries that were a tiny bit too large for the case. Batteries that would have been perfectly fine if the case had been a tiny, tiny bit larger. And note that Apple wouldn't be buying these batteries from Samsung if they bought them.
So nice try trying to spread some completely unfounded rumours about Apple.
Well done in talking a load of rubbish - it wasn't my intention at all to "spread some completely unfounded rumours"
I'm an apple fan not thats your business.
That is an anxiety-inducing but fascinating video. The ice bit was very eye-opening.
Well outright fraud is of course another matter, which Friedman addressed in the video as well. As for whether my opinion would change if personally affected, I would hope that it wouldn't, again barring any fraud or outright negligence. We really don't know the details behind Samsung's decision in this matter - I've read reports that Samsung "rushed" the product to market and this included supplementing their supply of batteries with their own in-house production vs their previous practice of only used a trusted third-party supplier. But rushing a product to market doesn't necessarily entail negligence. I work in the tech industry and I can't recall a product that wasn't rushed at some point of its development. The devil will be in the details, which I'm sure will come to light in due time.