iFixit Removes Galaxy Fold Teardown at Samsung's Request

[kdarling]

I do not get it, iFix it did not do anything wrong, so while Samsung can Ask to take it down, they cannot "request", unless it was a demo unit with NDA.....

That's reportedly all they did do, just ask. It was the secret iFixit source's request that actually convinced them to take it down.

No idea why asking is such a big deal to anyone, btw.

Heck, if these had been Apple preproduction units, we know from past history what kind of things they would do. Send some Apple security guys pretending to be cops. Or threaten a huge lawsuit.

 

[dilbert99]

I don’t think it’s that they attempted it, it’s that they yet again rushed something out to “be first” and it’s fallen on its ass.

They have been developing this for over 8 years...

 

[Dezmond]

They have been developing this for over 8 years...

And rushed it again to 'be first' to market despite the 8 year development time. The Galaxy Note 7 was the same... luckily they pulled this out before it went on sale.

 

[SoyCapitanSoyCapitan]

Fold my beer.

 

[Valkyre]

Samsung’s class on full display. Along with their flock as well.

 

[DNichter]

That's reportedly all they did do, just ask. It was the secret iFixit source's request that actually convinced them to take it down.

No idea why asking is such a big deal to anyone, btw.

Heck, if these had been Apple preproduction units, we know from past history what kind of things they would do. Send some Apple security guys pretending to be cops. Or threaten a huge lawsuit.

You don’t think these were the same devices they planned to sell days later?

 

[iosuser]

Barbra Streisand shakes head in horror.

That’s right lol. I had no interest in seeing this tear down until I read that it was removed.

Seriously though, all those review samples belong to Samsung. The source had no right to loan it out never mind for a tear down.

 

[Johns12]

You don’t think these were the same devices they planned to sell days later?

I don't think that matters. The Fold wasn't for sale yet.

 

[cmaier]

That's reportedly all they did do, just ask. It was the secret iFixit source's request that actually convinced them to take it down.

No idea why asking is such a big deal to anyone, btw.

Heck, if these had been Apple preproduction units, we know from past history what kind of things they would do. Send some Apple security guys pretending to be cops. Or threaten a huge lawsuit.

There is no allegation this was a preproduction unit, was there?

More importantly, there isn’t any allegation that the unit that was given to iFixIt was not the property of whoever gave it, is there? In other words, the Fold didn’t belong to Samsung (or, at least, I’ve seen no one say that it did). So you are comparing Apples to something else entirely.

Rumor is that the phone belonged to a carrier, who obtained it legitimately, and who was not violating any NDA or other agreement by giving it to iFixIt.

 

[dogslobber]

DMCA and the USA PATRIOT Act?

 

[cmaier]

DMCA and the USA PATRIOT Act?

Are we just blurting out bad things? Okay, I’ll play. MEAT DONUTS.

 

[DNichter]

I don't think that matters. The Fold wasn't for sale yet.

Well sure it does. If the person who posted that is saying that the devices in question weren’t the same as the devices they planned to release to consumers, I’d say that’s significant. Unlikely the case though considering they stopped the release to try and fix the issue.

 

[koruki]

"But out of respect for this partner"

translates to

But we want more Samsung stuff in the future..

 

[Abazigal]

"But out of respect for this partner"

translates to

But we want more Samsung stuff in the future..

I see it more as “better not to burn our bridges just yet”.

 

[Brandhouse]

And here's why I'm happy for Apple to take their time and release to market when things are down pat.

 

[dilbert99]

And rushed it again to 'be first' to market despite the 8 year development time. The Galaxy Note 7 was the same... luckily they pulled this out before it went on sale.

I don't get the feeling they rushed that or the note 7. Did they miss a beat? Certainly.
They did lots of folding testing in lab conditions. But unfamiliar actions are always the bit you have to pay more attention to. Like people pulling off the part of the screen thinking it was the usual sellophane protection.
Or people having foreign objects getting in that wouldn't be present in the automated test machines.
Lou did a 1000 fold test without issue.
Sometimes **** happens.

I can't remember hearing any issues with Samsung devices apart from the infamous note 7.
But I certainly remember bend gate, antenna gate, keyboard gate, charger gate, screen gate, power charger gate and so on with Apple.
Does that mean Apple rushed their devices too? This time, luckily they pulled the power charger before it went on sale.

 

[ravenstar]

Good point. If they got it legally, I think they would leave the tear down up. Freedom of the press and all if it was theirs and not subject to a non disclosure.

Most likely Samsung went to the partner who supplied the device and threatened to withhold all future products from their reviewers unless the iFixit tear down was removed. No legal implication and no "freedom of the press" issues. If your business is reviewing products and the the manufacturers won't give you products to review, you've got a problem.

 

[Victor Mortimer]

Most likely Samsung went to the partner who supplied the device and threatened to withhold all future products from their reviewers unless the iFixit tear down was removed. No legal implication and no "freedom of the press" issues. If your business is reviewing products and the the manufacturers won't give you products to review, you've got a problem.

And of course iFixit knows that the teardown is on the Internet Archive, which will take stuff down if asked. They're not asking. They did the thing that was asked (and definitely NOT required) by their source, while not taking any steps to attempt to actually make the teardown disappear from the internet.

iFixit are the good guys, they're being nice to whoever gave them a device to break, that's all there is to it. They want the teardown out there, otherwise the IA wouldn't still have it and we'd have to go to other means to see it, like me posting the copy that I grabbed just in case from the IA when iFixit took it down.

Overall, this thing was an interesting technology demo, but not a practical device. I'm not sure it served a useful function for anybody, and was incredibly fragile. Folding screens are actually a hard problem to solve, it's going to be a few more years before they're useful. I wonder if Samsung was ever seriously planning on shipping this as a product, or if these review units were originally intended as technology demos.

 

[Boosf]

Soooo....could we say then that Ifixit "folded" to Samsung's wishes?

 

[Analog Kid]

More importantly, there isn’t any allegation that the unit that was given to iFixIt was not the property of whoever gave it, is there? In other words, the Fold didn’t belong to Samsung (or, at least, I’ve seen no one say that it did). So you are comparing Apples to something else entirely.

I’ve linked you to this earlier, but I’ll try again:
https://www.tomsguide.com/us/galaxy-fold-recall,news-29918.html

“we signed a short-term loan agreement and expect to hand our unit back shortly.”

They were provided under short term loan agreements, so they did belong to Samsung.

 

[Analog Kid]

I don't get the feeling they rushed that or the note 7.

https://www.macrumors.com/2016/09/19/samsung-battery-crisis-dull-iphone/

I don't think Samsung has made that point publicly, but the reporting indicates that the Note7 was a high pressure effort to exploit what they thought was a weak iPhone 7 release.

I think Samsung did publicly say that the second round of failures was due to a rush to get the replacement devices out:
https://www.businessinsider.com/samsung-issues-galaxy-note-7-battery-report-2017-1


As to the question of whether the Fold was rushed or not, I think it’s a question of design philosophy. Apple and Samsung take very different approaches to product development. Samsung seems to feel pressure to show technical leadership, and to beat competitors to market with new ideas. Then they take what they learn from their early adopter products and improve later generations.

Apple doesn’t seem to rely as much on consumer feedback. They seem to feel confident in their ability to work out a design in their labs, and essentially only release 2nd or 3rd generation products. There are exceptions, and someone is going to scream about keyboards, but I think those are exceptions. Some people appreciate this approach, some people feel it’s too paternalistic.

Apple’s approach is higher stakes, for sure. They invest more engineering time and cost, and lose first to market advantage before learning if they’ve scored a hit. If they miss, they have a couple generations of product in the lab that are now essentially overhung.

Part of what drives Samsung’s approach is also the fact that their smartphones are showcase products for their component division. Samsung makes a lot more money from their components group than they do from mobile devices. They needed to show that they are at the cutting edge of display technology even more than they needed to show they were first with a foldable phone.

 

[GadgetBen]

No, they just have a serious bias towards repairability.

Apple, and I imagine others, has generally made it more difficult to access even basic replaceable parts. My 27" iMac has no way of opening it for cleaning. They could have put an access panel on the back with 8 or 10 screws but Jony doesn't like screws. They ruin the lines. Look at the Pencil 1 teardown. They had to slice it open.

I wouldn't want some random chav on the corner of a street to repair my Apple devices. I might as well hand it to the Chinese.

 

[Crowbot]

I wouldn't want some random chav on the corner of a street to repair my Apple devices. I might as well hand it to the Chinese.

I wouldn't want some random chav on the corner of a street to repair my Apple devices. I might as well hand it to the Chinese.

Neither would I. But after 35+ years servicing electronics I have the skills to take the back off a computer. But there is no practical way to clean the dust out of an iMac. A little thing like that can extend the life of a device for years. Fans and airways get clogged, heat builds up and only gets worse.

 

[cmaier]

I’ve linked you to this earlier, but I’ll try again:
https://www.tomsguide.com/us/galaxy-fold-recall,news-29918.html

“we signed a short-term loan agreement and expect to hand our unit back shortly.”

They were provided under short term loan agreements, so they did belong to Samsung.

No, those are the review units. This was obviously not a review unit since, once it was taken apart, it could never go back.

Again, the whispers in Silicon Valley are that the device came from a carrier.

 

[BvizioN]

The difference being, the Airpower was _never_ released in the hands for reviewers to expose any weaknesses the way the galaxy Fold was. At least Apple realized the Airpower wasn’t ready for a release and openly was admitted by Dan Riccio.

Amin.
This is a huge difference that people do not seem to realize. With the AirPower, Apple was concerned of the exact same fate that Galaxy Fold had and decided not to release it.
[doublepost=1556603325][/doublepost]

Say what you want about Samsung... at least they are innovating

Yep, clearly. Working 8 years on this stuff and teasing people for years with a Sci-Fi looking concept, to release a product that resembles 2 last decades phones sandwiched together, no were ready for customers, embarrass itself and damage its reputation again.
[doublepost=1556603902][/doublepost]

that most people would think not possible.

And for the right reasons. It wasn't possible just yet. Unless you do things on Samsungs ways, meaning fight to be the first. And don't get me wrong, I love Samsung displays and their latest Galaxy S models are great. Just don't understand the obsession of trying to be the first.