Sidebar Sidebar
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

Lancetx said:
The even more disturbing part of that story is how Samsung is actively trying to cover up the incidents.
Click to expand...

If so, then why didn't he claim that they offered to pay him to be quiet? Why did he wait a few days to say anything?

If Samsung wanted a cover up, then why did their leaked text suggest waiting instead of paying him off?

Lots of unanswered questions, but it sounds more like he was trying to blackmail Samsung into paying him to keep quiet, and they didn't.

triton100 said:
Think you'd better have a read of this:

Samsung knew a third replacement Note 7 caught fire on Tuesday and said nothing - The Verge
https://apple.news/A2AZHu55aQYWhzcoNTUkDwA
Click to expand...

Was it a replacement Note 7? Was it caused by an internal problem? If so, was the CPSC not informed? We just don't know yet. All we have is the internet echo chamber so far.

Personally, I agree with others that consumers should be directed to send all these phones directly to the CPSC, to give to a non-biased third party who can analyze their failure reason.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Analog Kid and Glideslope
Taz Mangus said:
I have seen reports that Samsung put too large a battery in the Note 7 which also contributed to the issue.
Click to expand...

Correct, the head of the CPSC has said that the original problem was that the supplied battery for some markets, was slightly thicker than it was supposed to be.

The phones that went to China had a different supplier whose batteries met the specs, and that's why there's only been one (still questionable) incident since then.

The replacement phones supposedly changed to a more reliable supplier, but perhaps not. Or perhaps the back case flexes too much and sitting on a phone impacts the battery. Or the replacements are affected by something entirely different. We don't know yet. That's why we need an unbiased third party analysis.

Taz Mangus said:
What is deplorable is the way Samsung has put people lives at risk. What is really sad is the way people are defending Samsung.
Click to expand...

I think it's far less about defending, than saying people should not jump to conclusions without all the facts. If the facts end up actually pointing at something deliberate, then go crazy.

It's like when people automatically assumed that the Error 53 was a deliberate attempt by Apple to prevent third party part replacements, or when people thought Apple was tracking them with the location cache. In both cases, I had to spend a ton of effort here defending Apple.

If you're going to bash something, do it with facts, not assumptions or something that "the Internet says".
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ploki and Glideslope
kdarling said:
Correct, the head of the CPSC has said that the original problem was that the supplied battery for some markets, was slightly thicker than it was supposed to be.

The phones that went to China had a different supplier whose batteries met the specs, and that's why there's only been one (still questionable) incident since then.

The replacement phones supposedly changed to a more reliable supplier, but perhaps not. Or perhaps the back case flexes too much and sitting on a phone impacts the battery. Or the replacements are affected by something entirely different. We don't know yet. That's why we need an unbiased third party analysis.



What's sad is people jumping to conclusions without all the facts.

It's like when people automatically assumed that the Error 53 was a deliberate attempt by Apple to prevent third party part replacements, or when people thought Apple was tracking them with the location cache. In both cases, I had to spend a ton of time defending Apple's developers.

If you're going to bash something, do it with facts, not assumptions or something that "the Internet says".
Click to expand...
I think we have enough facts to state with certainty that the company is deplorable, thank you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NetMage, ErikGrim, BlueParadox and 2 others
kdarling said:
Correct, the head of the CPSC has said that the original problem was that the supplied battery for some markets, was slightly thicker than it was supposed to be.
...
Click to expand...

Can you supply a CPSC link to that rendered conclusion? Would like to see the complete quote in context.

Thanx...
 
kdarling said:
If so, then why didn't he claim that they offered to pay him to be quiet? Why did he wait a few days to say anything?

If Samsung wanted a cover up, then why did their leaked text suggest waiting instead of paying him off?

Lots of unanswered questions, but it sounds more like he was trying to blackmail Samsung into paying him to keep quiet, and they didn't.
Click to expand...

This is a public safety issue here. The fact that Samsung has remained silent publicly for almost a week even after several incidents have already occurred with replacement devices says plenty enough about their motives.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ladyc0524
Zedcars said:
I think we have enough facts to state with certainty that the company is deplorable, thank you.
Click to expand...

c322eda84fed982d85c6ad59de21f507.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: ErikGrim, determined09, DVDxR and 1 other person
kdarling said:
It's like when people automatically assumed that the Error 53 was a deliberate attempt by Apple to prevent third party part replacements, or when people thought Apple was tracking them with the location cache. In both cases, I had to spend a ton of effort here defending Apple.
Click to expand...

You are comparing an incident that disabled some people's phones to a safety situation that has put people's lives at risk. Not even close to the same type of situation.
[doublepost=1476034153][/doublepost]
Lancetx said:
This is a public safety issue here. The fact that Samsung has remained silent publicly for almost a week even after several incidents have already occurred with replacement devices says plenty enough about their motives.
Click to expand...

And now the replacement phones are overheating. Samsung pushing out a fix which clearly has not been tested correctly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BlueParadox, Feenician and I7guy
Even the replacement phones are burning up and I'm still not hearing a "cute" name like much smaller Apple defects get, like "Bendgate" or "Touch Disease".

They're literally exploding and the replacements aren't any better! This deserves a name.

Maybe Third-Degree-Burn-Gate?
 
  • Like
Reactions: determined09
Jakexb said:
Even the replacement phones are burning up and I'm still not hearing a "cute" name like much smaller Apple defects get, like "Bendgate" or "Touch Disease".

They're literally exploding and the replacements aren't any better! This deserves a name.

Maybe Third-Degree-Burn-Gate?
Click to expand...
Only Apple gets the cutesy 'gate names.
Samsung does not garner the same "endearment" as Apple; they're just another corporation.
 
triton100 said:
Think you'd better have a read of this:

Samsung knew a third replacement Note 7 caught fire on Tuesday and said nothing - The Verge
https://apple.news/A2AZHu55aQYWhzcoNTUkDwA
Click to expand...
That doesn't really change anything about my point. First and foremost, Samsung in fact doesn't know another replacement caught fire. Someone said one did, but nobody technically qualified has examined it.

Second, as I said, Samsung got dinged in the first instance for issuing a recall before coordinating with government regulators.

I have no idea what's going on inside Samsung. My only point is that on the face of it there's no real evidence that corporate greed is eclipsing customer safety unless you start from that position and work to interpret every innuendo to fit that theory. What I see so far is an enormous multi-national organization trying to deal with an enormous multi-national problem and doing it kind of badly. I can't see anything yet in regards to motive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ploki
 
  • Like
Reactions: NetMage and determined09
Black Magic said:
Valid point. Just a theory I came up with on the fly to garner and maintain customer loyalty. Probably reckless but in a forum where the only consequence for sharing a thought is a written tongue lashing from a random human, I think I will be ok. :)
Click to expand...
Tongue lashing of the worst kind. I'm sure I've successfully ruined your day and learned to think twice now before ever posting about good service recovery.
 
Samsung should just go ahead and discontinue this device altogether and just focus on the S8. It's far to mired in negative controversy at this point anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Glideslope
Go and file class action law suit against Samsung's still exploding replaced defective Galaxy 7. At least iPhone 6 is not exploding.
 
Feenician said:
12 days, eight incidents, no comment from Samsung. Where's all the posts to tell us how good and honorable Samsung are now?
Click to expand...
All's quiet on the Android front.
Probably all in today's lead Class Action story.
Infinitely easier time there to post negativity, no deflection required.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back