iFixit Removes Galaxy Fold Teardown at Samsung's Request

[Analog Kid]

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.

Sorry, the word “carrier” didn’t click the first time through...

Still, not sure I buy that. Carriers hold power over Samsung and, despite releasing a unit before the approved ship date, really wouldn’t need to jump when Samsung barked. Also, the carriers have just as much to lose from iFixit’s article as Samsung does.

Makes more sense that the reason the article was taken down is precisely because a reviewer couldn’t return a device. For example, how would Samsung know which carrier slipped them the unit, versus knowing which reviewer can’t account for one?

 

[fairuz]

The folding phone would be useful, just wait a few generations first. I'm glad Samsung is trying it.
[doublepost=1556607349][/doublepost]

Are we gonna sit here and pretend that all the Apple lawsuits about the various (insertgate) the iPhone has had over the years we’re not a thing

Again.... At least Samsung is trying

They weren't really a thing. I've owned so many Apple devices that were centers of these big lawsuits, never noticed the problem people were freaking out about. The iPhone 4 thing was the biggest joke; I could degrade my reception, but only if I squeezed the phone unnaturally hard and held it in a weird position to begin with. Fact is millions bought the stuff and didn't care. Lawyers.

 

[FFR]

The folding phone would be useful, just wait a few generations first. I'm glad Samsung is trying it.
[doublepost=1556607349][/doublepost]
They weren't really a thing. I've owned so many Apple devices that were centers of these big lawsuits, never noticed the problem people were freaking out about. The iPhone 4 thing was the biggest joke; I could degrade my reception, but only if I squeezed the phone unnaturally hard and held it in a weird position to begin with. Fact is millions bought the stuff and didn't care.

Are you getting a galaxy fold at 2000 dollars?

 

[dilbert99]

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.

I don't think it was rushed if it took them over 8 years to develop. It certainly is a very hard problem to crack which I cn understand that for that reason it looks like they rushed or wanted to be first.
They did do a lot of testing of the screens, obviously not the right kind of testing letting people in the company test them in real life scenarios.

 

[BvizioN]

I don't think it was rushed if it took them over 8 years to develop. It certainly is a very hard problem to crack.

If it is a very hard problem to crack and you have not done it yet, meaning is not ready yet, does that not suggest that the product was rushed? It does not matter how long you been working on a project, you introduce it to the masses when it is ready. And Apple is not exempt on this either, though Apple is known not to have the desire to be first on stuff.

 

[dilbert99]

If it is a very hard problem to crack and you have not done it yet, meaning is not ready yet, does that not suggest that the product was rushed? It does not matter how long you been working on a project, you introduce it to the masses when it is ready. And Apple is not exempt on this either, though Apple is known not to have the desire to be first on stuff.

Thats one way to look at it.
I think it was more a case of the testing was clinical rather than adhoc.
It "met" the technical requirements (the easier part) but not the human requirements (harder)

But someone else commented on one of my replies saying that Samsung had said/admitted that (possibly the battery?) issue was rushed so who knows.

 

[BvizioN]

Thats one way to look at it.
I think it was more a case of the testing was clinical rather than adhoc.

I agree with you on that. Perhaps trying to be too secretive about it and not letting it on employes hands to test it.

 

[AppleScruff1]

Makes sense why they want it removed. Likely because ifixit exposed the Folds weaknesses and Samsung doesn’t want the criticism, nor the embarrassment they are already enduring. I suppose that’s what happens when you put out a shoddy product that isn’t ready to be in the consumers hands.

Definitely not ready for prime time.

 

[fairuz]

Are you getting a galaxy fold at 2000 dollars?

Why would I?

 

[dazzer21-2]

Umm what are you talking about "6 months continuous use...." it took 1-2 days worth of use..

It was rhetorical - applies to ANY product.
[doublepost=1556707115][/doublepost]

1) you don’t know how much time Samsung spent testing

2) yes it’s possible to cram years of folding and unfolding into a very short period of time, and Samsung did exactly that

It was a rhetorical question - applies to any product. For instance - one of my iMacs is left on 24/7, has been for 8 years. How do you predict that sort of reliability (or not) in just the 12 months or so it might have taken from conception to market? Where does that extra 7 years of QA testing come from? It could have been that the expiry date for every single iMac of that vintage was 13 months. Who'd have known until it happened, including Apple? Apple (in my experience) has been lucky in that regard. Samsung, for whatever reason, failed spectacularly!!!

 

[FFR]

Why would I?

No idea why anybody would want a 2000 dollar android tablet either.

 

[aarond12]

Samsung is trying? They don't even have to make the OS like Apple does. They use Google's mess. They had one job -- make the hardware. Yeah, obviously that isn't easy, but they didn't have two jobs, making the OS and the hardware.

 

[fairuz]

No idea why anybody would want a 2000 dollar android tablet either.

I wouldn't want an Android device of any sort either, or a tablet of any sort.