Chinese Consumer Group Complains of Spontaneous iPhone 6 Fires, but Apple Blames 'Physical Damage'

[justperry]

So 8 potential deaths and that's assuming they weren't driving with a car full of children at the time is considered acceptable in your sick world!!!
What the hell is wrong with you man!!!

100% safety is an illusion.
The one you reply to seems to have a better view on this world as you do, as bad as it is, **** happens.

Firstly, poor analogy. Someone shooting someone else is a deliberate action with intent to harm/kill and other then self defence there is no acceptable argument of mitigation. Moreover, its erroneous to draw parallels between a phone and a hand gun and as such its an inappropriate analogy laced with emotion rather then genuinely aimed at a reasonable comparison.

Even if a handgun went off accidentally and killed someone, many people would question why the bearer of the firearm was carrying one in the first place. No one is reasonably going to question why someone was carrying a phone or a manufacturer chose to use a Li-ion battery in a consumer device.

WRT point scoring, it strikes me that it is you that views the world in a manner that is not normal. You seem to have taken umbrage because someone has perfectly reasonably drawn a distinction between two similar types of failure. And your subsequent post reveals that it is because you can't stand that someone may possibly have attempted to point score against a brand you appear to want to protect from criticism like it is your child.

If you really believed as per your original post that its sick 8 people could possibly have come in harms way, it should follow you would pour even more scorn on a product that has had a greater level of failure and was forced to pull the product. Instead you focussed on the lesser failure.

It's perfectly reasonable to draw the distinction between a small number of reported failures in proportion to the huge number of devices shipped, against the larger number of failures in proportion to a much smaller number of devices shipped and in a smaller time frame.

What you seem to be unable to grasp is that some Li-ion batteries can fail and catch fire and the more you ship the more likely it is someone will experience such a failure. Its an inherent risk albeit a very small one. Samsung appeared to have gone significantly past that point of acceptability and were forced to recall and cancel the product.

I don't think that reflects badly on Samsung. I think that reflects well on them that they acted promptly and despite the fact it caused significant damage to their business. Many unscrupulous businesses may well have stuck their head in the sand and left their customers at risk for much longer. Moreover, they have a track record of shipping lots of products without any such safety concerns and so one should understand sometimes these things happen and the more important thing is how the manufacturer responds. But at this point the two incidents are not comparable, wether you take it as point scoring or not.

Well said.

 

[admob71]

Firstly, poor analogy. Someone shooting someone else is a deliberate action with intent to harm/kill and other then self defence there is no acceptable argument of mitigation. Moreover, its erroneous to draw parallels between a phone and a hand gun and as such its an inappropriate analogy laced with emotion rather then genuinely aimed at a reasonable comparison.

Even if a handgun went off accidentally and killed someone, many people would question why the bearer of the firearm was carrying one in the first place. No one is reasonably going to question why someone was carrying a phone or a manufacturer chose to use a Li-ion battery in a consumer device.

WRT point scoring, it strikes me that it is you that views the world in a manner that is not normal. You seem to have taken umbrage because someone has perfectly reasonably drawn a distinction between two similar types of failure. And your subsequent post reveals that it is because you can't stand that someone may possibly have attempted to point score against a brand you appear to want to protect from criticism like it is your child.

If you really believed as per your original post that its sick 8 people could possibly have come in harms way, it should follow you would pour even more scorn on a product that has had a greater level of failure and was forced to pull the product. Instead you focussed on the lesser failure.

It's perfectly reasonable to draw the distinction between a small number of reported failures in proportion to the huge number of devices shipped, against the larger number of failures in proportion to a much smaller number of devices shipped and in a smaller time frame.

What you seem to be unable to grasp is that some Li-ion batteries can fail and catch fire and the more you ship the more likely it is someone will experience such a failure. Its an inherent risk albeit a very small one. Samsung appeared to have gone significantly past that point of acceptability and were forced to recall and cancel the product.

I don't think that reflects badly on Samsung. I think that reflects well on them that they acted promptly and despite the fact it caused significant damage to their business. Many unscrupulous businesses may well have stuck their head in the sand and left their customers at risk for much longer. Moreover, they have a track record of shipping lots of products without any such safety concerns and so one should understand sometimes these things happen and the more important thing is how the manufacturer responds. But at this point the two incidents are not comparable, wether you take it as point scoring or not.

What a weird reply, I have zero brand loyalty which serves me very well thank you, my point being and I'll repeat it again, is that thinking that only a small ammount of exploring batteries is ok, because someone else has had more exploding batteries. The fact that someone could have died quite easily doesn't appear to even register highlighted by the LOL at the end of the sentence. Would the original poster be LOL ING if one of his family members was holding a phone when it went up in flames. And further more would he be defending Apple cos they only had 8 blow.up so what's the deal, samsung have had 40 LOL LOL . There are some seriously mixed up folk on this forum!!

 

[kdarling]

Good point, however, forgive my ignorance, but is the precedence that the PRC are adopting untenable?

Great question. I don't know, but my guess is that China wants to have its cake and eat it too.

That is, I think they want their own citizens to buy from Chinese manufacturers, and yet they ALSO want foreigners to continue to use Chinese factories to build devices to be sold outside of China.

Which is a great plan if they pull it off. Buying local means their own makers can continue to innovate in their own way, plus it allows the government to perhaps control device security and comms.

The downside would be to foreigners like Apple who had hoped to ramp up China sales as well as manufacturing.

What are your thoughts?

 

[johnnyturbouk]

China wants to have its cake and eat it too.

Is the message they are sending, and TC seems to be placating Chinese feelings as not to ebb or limit Apple's international market share!

I feel this is setting a dangerous precedent and China may find itself in the not too distant future without both decimated foreign investment and gross unemployment, with subsequent plumage of their GDP and economy overall.

An interesting side issue the rate at which they [PRC] are buying foreign debt, it is almost like they have engineered this as indemnity. I think Apple, as others need to realise their current strategy of appeasement and burying the head in the sand is not working, certainly not in the long term, and we need send a strong message that capitalism is a two-way street.

TC appears to be far too much of a nice guy to do this, whereas SJ would have a far lower threshold in telling them to royally take a hike, and pull out. Then again, TC is [allegedly] known for his business acumen, whilst SJ was an inventor / innovator, however, SJ seemed to really stand by his volition. This is simply my interpretation of events and I may very well be wrong in that SJ was a pussycat and TC is a tiger in such matters.

 

[smacrumon]

Just some observations in red bold.

Or more accurately, the "red bold" is introducing doubt and extra unverified info to the reporting.

I find it very unlikely a new iphone wasn't being charged with a brand new genuine Apple cable/charger.
Additionally, an iphone shouldn't explode if it drops. Bombs explode when they drop, iPhones shouldn't.
Likewise an unauthorised charger shouldn't cause the device to explode. The device should be able to recognise defective cables and chargers, a charging current that deviates from norm or odd charging behavior and prevent the device from accepting charge so it doesn't explode.

This is isn't the original iphone. What has apple been doing in this space regarding preventative safety? Little to nothing apart from underplaying issues and other crisis management.
[doublepost=1481178975][/doublepost]

So you found 5? How many were sold?
Do you think Apple should recall the device? I ask because the way you worded your comment insinuates that a large number of them caught fire and we all know that's not true.

Five in one minute.
Lots more not reported.
Apple is great at underplaying issues and managing them. Apple's recall on defective charges earlier this year was actually 12 years in the making. It has issues with chargers since the early 2000s.
Apple does the least and only when pushed, and at other times plays things down or hides until really pushed.
It's not the behavior I want Apple engaging in.

 

[WRChris]

Or more accurately, the "red bold" is introducing doubt and extra unverified info to the reporting.

I find it very unlikely a new iphone wasn't being charged with a brand new genuine Apple cable/charger.
Additionally, an iphone shouldn't explode if it drops. Bombs explode when they drop, iPhones shouldn't.
Likewise an unauthorised charger shouldn't cause the device to explode. The device should be able to recognise defective cables and chargers, a charging current that deviates from norm or odd charging behavior and prevent the device from accepting charge so it doesn't explode.

This is isn't the original iphone. What has apple been doing in this space regarding preventative safety? Little to nothing apart from underplaying issues and other crisis management.
[doublepost=1481178975][/doublepost]
Five in one minute.
Lots more not reported.
Apple is great at underplaying issues and managing them. Apple's recall on defective charges earlier this year was actually 12 years in the making. It has issues with chargers since the early 2000s.
Apple does the least and only when pushed, and at other times plays things down or hides until really pushed.
It's not the behavior I want Apple engaging in.

Get over the chargers man you have been using that for at least six months straight. Not saying there wasn't faulty chargers but cmon man. Back to the batteries, why are you so hellbent on proving a point that you found "5 in minutes" so it must be a widespread issue? Batteries aren't new, some will fail, some will last longer and some will be faulty. There are so many different variables you are not considering. You act like that because you skimmed headlines on google you know that Apple has a defective battery in all iPhone 6. 100% false. I know it doesn't paint a proper picture of the whole, but I've never had a faulty charger for my computers or my phones, it's always the cable ends breaking.

People on the internet complain about everything you are going to find those headlines about anything you search for.
[doublepost=1481235745][/doublepost]

What a weird reply, I have zero brand loyalty which serves me very well thank you, my point being and I'll repeat it again, is that thinking that only a small ammount of exploring batteries is ok, because someone else has had more exploding batteries. The fact that someone could have died quite easily doesn't appear to even register highlighted by the LOL at the end of the sentence. Would the original poster be LOL ING if one of his family members was holding a phone when it went up in flames. And further more would he be defending Apple cos they only had 8 blow.up so what's the deal, samsung have had 40 LOL LOL . There are some seriously mixed up folk on this forum!!

you misunderstand, no one is ok with exploding batteries but if you think you can pump out 70 million devices a year without one battery issue you are insane and don't understand batteries.

 

[smacrumon]

Get over the chargers man you have been using that for at least six months straight. Not saying there wasn't faulty chargers but cmon man. Back to the batteries, why are you so hellbent on proving a point that you found "5 in minutes" so it must be a widespread issue? Batteries aren't new, some will fail, some will last longer and some will be faulty. There are so many different variables you are not considering. You act like that because you skimmed headlines on google you know that Apple has a defective battery in all iPhone 6. 100% false. I know it doesn't paint a proper picture of the whole, but I've never had a faulty charger for my computers or my phones, it's always the cable ends breaking.

People on the internet complain about everything you are going to find those headlines about anything you search for.
[doublepost=1481235745][/doublepost]
you misunderstand, no one is ok with exploding batteries but if you think you can pump out 70 million devices a year without one battery issue you are insane and don't understand batteries.

Just keeping the conversation real, yo. Apple has problems, and the largest budget to fix them, but doesn't until the final second. No need to deny it. Keep it real.

 

[nebo1ss]

So which Phone is McRumors referring too. The first part of the article mentions the 6S then it switches to the 6 in the latter part?