Samsung to Reveal Results of Galaxy Note7 Fire Investigation Later This Month

[name99]

"Rumors suggest Samsung pushed suppliers to meet tighter deadlines for an earlier launch, in order to beat the iPhone 7, leading to critical oversights that led to some batteries catching fire."

Uhh, aren't those suppliers ALSO "Samsung"? This seems to be an attempt to fob off the ultimate engineering blame on "not-Samsung" which simply isn't reasonable.
In the case of the batteries, for example, the supplier for 65% of the batteries was Samsung SDI Co.
I don't know how the blame for accidents splits across that vs the other battery supplier, but at least SOME of the fires were in Samsung SDI models.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/samsung...ll-brings-battery-maker-into-focus-1473082175

 

[DUIduckSAUCE]

Wait...let me get this straight....Do people still BUY Samsung smartphones? Their flagship model caught fire and EXPLODED...SPONTANEOUSLY! Then, after the explanation and recall, the replacement phones had the same problem!! They could have the coolest phones on the market, but you couldn't pay me enough money to bring one of their products into my house and actually plug it into an outlet. Well, I suppose if I were planning to burn my house down and collect the insurance money...yeah, then maybe I'd consider it. Otherwise, I think I'd have to have my head examined before trusting a Samsung smartphone. My 2-year-old Samsung washer and dryer give me all kinds of problems as it is. I think I'm done with that company going forward.

They are the number one smartphone manufacturer in the world. So yep people still buy them.

 

[DiamonDecoden]

Say what you will... I commend them for putting in the effort. And the fact that people choose to ridicule the company for THIS. Well, says more about the individual than anything IMO.

Haven't owned a Samsung device since the flip phone era, but credit where it's due. Hopefully this leads to industry learning and an incredible successor device.

I agree. This incident will help tighten their QA / QC process. I owned a Note 1 or 2 when it first came out. I think they got the right idea however, in the end, I switch to Apple because the menus look prettier design wise (cleaner). I do think their device provide lots of value to the consumer. The note is my 2nd choice for a phone after iphone.

 

[psalazarc]

You know.. The fact that the phone exploded isn't a "Samsung-only" issue. Mistakes happen. It's a shame, unfortunate, dangerous and could be devastating for a company and a family. If they really rushed it, they are to blame, yet they didn't expect that to happen. So I can't really blame them too much. People should've bashed them for it. Apple could have had the exact same problem too. So saying "don't buy any Samsung phone" was a stretch.

AT FIRST

But then something happened. They re-issued the phone, and the same thing kept happening. Which means they didn't really know what caused it and rushed "whatever solution they came up with", not caring about the safety of their customers. Or they DID know what was wrong, but decided to still sell it, hoping it wouldn't happen, or not be as widespread. Either way, that is not only a lack of respect to their customers. Who cares about "honor". It's actually a REALLY serious precedent, saying they indeed risked the safety of EVERYONE, as an attempt to minimize loses. That is despicable, and should be punished. Only when it was far too spread they decided to end the product. But KNOWINGLY risking their users. That I can't let go. And I don't know why others do.

 

[citysnaps]

.
Here's an excellent Bloomberg story on how Samsung rushed their phone, with the resulting adverse consequences.

 

[Glideslope]

I thought everyone agreed the phones were destroyed by "internal Combustion?"

 

[ani4ani]

The amount of pro Samsung post and upvote on a "Mac" site is just amazing. This thread just goes to show where all the toxic posts of this site is originated. It also show how insecure Samsung's internet warriors are. Wasting all their holiday times hating and flaming on brand that has nothing to do with their live.

I think they do it actually to specifically make you waste your holiday time defending your brand

 

[Analog Kid]

Heck, it only happened to about one in forty thousand units. So unless you had a good idea what the cause was, imagine how many units you'd have to test to make the result repeatable.

I imagined it was less frequent than this, but the best numbers I can find are about 4.3 million units sold. So 100 failures would be about 1 in 40k, which sounds about right. I forgot how spread out Samsung's volumes are. Apple sells 200 million units across 2 or 3 models. Samsung sells 200+ models.

I suspect many more than just that 100 units are susceptible to failure though-- those 100 were all in a very short period of time after release. Once they have enough units in the lab, they'll probably be able to reproduce this pretty quickly.

Still, I don't think we'll learn anything more than the mechanical cause of the failure which will be interesting but also pretty useless. The Bloomberg piece is equally useless-- there's always pressure to get to market. Unless there's a paper trail showing that someone intentionally ignored a warning, it's all still an accident resulting from designing on the cutting edge (there's a reason that term is used...).

Best we can hope for from this is better awareness. This will become the example of a problem no design team ever wants to be associated with in the future-- an image to focus on when tempted by over confidence.

 

[kdarling]

When was the last time iPhones were banned on US flights?

Doesn't matter, although let's take the time to add that it wasn't really a safety issue, as iPhones have caught fire while actually in flight and they were never banned. Ditto for much larger fires, like from laptops. The Note ban actually smacked more of being an economic or political action.

What I was responding to was a post from someone claiming that they would never buy anything from a company whose products had caught fire. If so, then they pretty much can't buy from anyone, including Apple.

I recommend using google... multiple Samsung replacement devices caught fire on planes.

Yes, while on the ground at an airport gate. I said while "in flight", which iPhones have done, but not the Note 7.

Yet even with such a demonstrably historical iPhone threat, no one really cares. Nor should they. It's just not that big a deal, despite attempts to make it sound so.

The FAA has limits on battery sizes to prevent fires that actually could be a real danger in the cabin. Smartphones don't come anywhere close to those limits, not by a long shot. (The FAA is okay with up to 160 Watt hour batteries in the cabin. And you can carry multiple instances of those. An individual Note 7 battery is only about 18 Watt hours, or about 1/9th the power limit.)

iPhones have NEVER caught fire on planes accidentally - the only times were intentional punctures of the battery. Almost every iPhone fire, in any capacity, came from non OEM third party accessories. Not the iPhone.

So you're claiming that when this girl's iPhone burst into flames while still in flight over an hour out from Honolulu, it's because she punctured the battery?

Again, I'm not saying that the Note wasn't more prone to fires. Apparently it was (although if you actually read the reports at the CPSC, it's interesting how many were from either abused phones, or were claims of fires from phones that the person no longer had or even had a receipt for... but wanted a free phone anyway).

But claiming that stock iPhones using OEM chargers have never caught fire, is just mathematically invalid. It's a fact of life with Li-Ion batteries that many common factors, from compression to too hot/cold temperatures while charging, can start a cell on the path to a failure.

Personally, my guess is that many phablet fires... of any brand... come from people sitting on their phone in their back pocket, even though manufacturers try to plan for people doing it.

 

[mejsric]

The amount of pro Samsung post and upvote on a "Mac" site is just amazing. This thread just goes to show where all the toxic posts of this site is originated. It also show how insecure Samsung's internet warriors are. Wasting all their holiday times hating and flaming on brand that has nothing to do with their live.

I think they are just working. Just understand them, they are making money online.

 

[kdarling]

As for adapter fires, all of the power adapter fires I've seen cited are from 3rd party knock-off adapters.

It might be over a longer timeline (or at least, it took longer for Apple to acknowledge), but plenty of OFFICIAL Apple batteries, chargers and adapters have sent people to the hospital, caused multiple fires and shocks, and are blamed for burning down at least one house.

For examples:

US Apple Recalls:

• 2001 - Apple recalls 570,000 adapters with fire hazard sold 1998-2000.
• 2004 - Apple recalls 28,000 laptop batteries with internal short.
• 2005 - Apple recalls 128,000 laptop batteries with internal short.
• 2006 - Apple recalls 1.1 million (1.8M worldwide) battery packs w/ fire hazard, injuries, property damage.

(That last recall involved as many batteries in the US, as with the Samsung Note 7 recall in the US.)

US Apple Class Action Settlements:

• 2008 - 2.3 million adapters w/fire hazard sold since 2001, took two years to settle.
• 2011 - 10 million power connectors, fire hazard since 2006, took two years to settle.

Again, this is not an excuse for the Samsung recall. Bash them all you want (I'm a Moto and HTC fan myself). Just use facts to do so.

E.g. it's a false claim that only third party products cause Apple related fire or shock hazards.

(It doesn't matter if it's an official adapter or not. Don't sleep with your phone charging under your pillow or blankets. Do try to put chargers on a nonflammable surface.)

 

[A MacBook lover]

Doesn't matter

Diluting this debacle and comparing it to something far less doesn't make it any less serious, it just makes you a Samsung apologist.

 

[macTW]

Doesn't matter, although let's take the time to add that it wasn't really a safety issue, as iPhones have caught fire while actually in flight and they were never banned. Ditto for much larger fires, like from laptops. The Note ban actually smacked more of being an economic or political action.

What I was responding to was a post from someone claiming that they would never buy anything from a company whose products had caught fire. If so, then they pretty much can't buy from anyone, including Apple.



Yes, while on the ground at an airport gate. I said while "in flight", which iPhones have done, but not the Note 7.

Yet even with such a demonstrably historical iPhone threat, no one really cares. Nor should they. It's just not that big a deal, despite attempts to make it sound so.

The FAA has limits on battery sizes to prevent fires that actually could be a real danger in the cabin. Smartphones don't come anywhere close to those limits, not by a long shot. (The FAA is okay with up to 160 Watt hour batteries in the cabin. And you can carry multiple instances of those. An individual Note 7 battery is only about 18 Watt hours, or about 1/9th the power limit.)



So you're claiming that when this girl's iPhone burst into flames while still in flight over an hour out from Honolulu, it's because she punctured the battery?

Again, I'm not saying that the Note wasn't more prone to fires. Apparently it was (although if you actually read the reports at the CPSC, it's interesting how many were from either abused phones, or were claims of fires from phones that the person no longer had or even had a receipt for... but wanted a free phone anyway).

But claiming that stock iPhones using OEM chargers have never caught fire, is just mathematically invalid. It's a fact of life with Li-Ion batteries that many common factors, from compression to too hot/cold temperatures while charging, can start a cell on the path to a failure.

Personally, my guess is that many phablet fires... of any brand... come from people sitting on their phone in their back pocket, even though manufacturers try to plan for people doing it.

In reply to the video: I should correct my original statement - iPhones don't catch fire on planes unless through battery damage, either punctured or non-OEM charging accessories, which I expect was the case here. (Purely my speculation based on the people I see using and purchasing) The largest consumer of non OEM parts I believe are teens, for the cheapness and colors. Which were the women in the video.

 

[I7guy]

Diluting the this debacle and comparing it to something far less doesn't make it any less serious, it just makes you a Samsung apologist.

I wouldn't go with the labels, but its inevitable that Apple got dragged into this.

 

[DanTheAppleMan]

Place your bets, will we see:
"Sorry everyone, our bad"
Or "It was company X's fault"...

 

[Klyster]

With 750,000 approx Note 7's still in the wild, you'd think statistically, there'd be more reports of fires.

I might be wrong, but they seem to have stopped igniting.....

 

[kdarling]

Diluting this debacle and comparing it to something far less doesn't make it any less serious, it just makes you a Samsung apologist.

It makes me someone who prefers facts to hysteria. The Samsung problem was serious, but not in the ways that some seem to believe.

I've defended Apple in the same way when people have bashed them using mob mentality. (Not saying you did. Talking about those who think fires only happen to non-Apple products.)

In reply to the video: I should correct my original statement - iPhones don't catch fire on planes unless through battery damage, either punctured or non-OEM charging accessories, which I expect was the case here. (Purely my speculation based on the people I see using and purchasing) The largest consumer of non OEM parts I believe are teens, for the cheapness and colors. Which were the women in the video.

Since you're just speculating, sure, anything's possible, although the charging cable shown in the video and other news photos looks like a stock Apple one. I cannot find any verifiable info on whether it was or not.

Umm. You might want to add third party accessories to your list, if you haven't already. Reading aviation safety reports, there's been at least two iPhone related fires where an airline approved credit card reader jacket was involved.

As for the idea that unabused stock iPhones (or any such Li-Ion powered device, for that matter) won't catch fire, that's statistically an impossible claim. Even the most optimistic Li-Ion cell failure rate prediction says that at least a hundred iOS devices WILL have done so over the years.

 

[AppleScruff1]

Wait...let me get this straight....Do people still BUY Samsung smartphones? Their flagship model caught fire and EXPLODED...SPONTANEOUSLY! Then, after the explanation and recall, the replacement phones had the same problem!! They could have the coolest phones on the market, but you couldn't pay me enough money to bring one of their products into my house and actually plug it into an outlet. Well, I suppose if I were planning to burn my house down and collect the insurance money...yeah, then maybe I'd consider it. Otherwise, I think I'd have to have my head examined before trusting a Samsung smartphone. My 2-year-old Samsung washer and dryer give me all kinds of problems as it is. I think I'm done with that company going forward.

Better give up your Apple products with Samsung components. You never know what might happen.
[doublepost=1483403716][/doublepost]

Wrong. Third-party, non OEM chargers are what have caught fire and shorted phones, caused burns, etc.

And iPhones have caught fire without charging.

 

[RedOrchestra]

With 750,000 approx Note 7's still in the wild, you'd think statistically, there'd be more reports of fires.

I might be wrong, but they seem to have stopped igniting.....

The Note 7's were never banned on flights in Europe. The proviso was 1) totally turned off, not just in Airplane mode; 2) not packed in either checked luggage or in bags in overhead bins - so either on your person or in a bag under the seat ahead of you.

 

[AppleScruff1]

Wait...let me get this straight....Do people still BUY Samsung smartphones? Their flagship model caught fire and EXPLODED...SPONTANEOUSLY! Then, after the explanation and recall, the replacement phones had the same problem!! They could have the coolest phones on the market, but you couldn't pay me enough money to bring one of their products into my house and actually plug it into an outlet. Well, I suppose if I were planning to burn my house down and collect the insurance money...yeah, then maybe I'd consider it. Otherwise, I think I'd have to have my head examined before trusting a Samsung smartphone. My 2-year-old Samsung washer and dryer give me all kinds of problems as it is. I think I'm done with that company going forward.

People still buy Ford Explorers, Firestone tires and Tylenol.

 

[I7guy]

People still buy Ford Explorers, Firestone tires and Tylenol.

Tylenol wasn't at fault and Ford, Firestone, VW et al took a hit to their respective reputations.
[doublepost=1483404101][/doublepost]

Better give up your Apple products with Samsung components. You never know what might happen.
[doublepost=1483403716][/doublepost]
And iPhones have caught fire without charging.

But iphones weren't under a recall for catching fire spontaneously or under an aircraft ban in the US. That is @kdarling discussion though.

 

[AppleScruff1]

Tylenol wasn't at fault and Ford, Firestone, VW et al took a hit to their respective reputations.
[doublepost=1483404101][/doublepost]
But iphones weren't under a recall or an aircraft ban in the US. That is @kdarling discussion though.

As did Samsung.

 

[I7guy]

As did Samsung.

Tylenol was sabotaged, Samsung wasn't. So I'm unclear as to why Tylenol was listed.

 

[AppleScruff1]

Tylenol wasn't at fault and Ford, Firestone, VW et al took a hit to their respective reputations.
[doublepost=1483404101][/doublepost]
But iphones weren't under a recall for catching fire spontaneously or under an aircraft ban in the US. That is @kdarling discussion though.

The post I replied to stated that all iPhone fires were caused by by non OEM chargers which is 100% false.
[doublepost=1483404517][/doublepost]

Tylenol was sabotaged, Samsung wasn't. So I'm unclear as to why Tylenol was listed.

People bought Tylenol during the incidents of poisoning before the recall and bought it after it was reintroduced.

 

[I7guy]

The post I replied to stated that all iPhone fires were caused by by non OEM chargers which is 100% false.
[doublepost=1483404517][/doublepost]

People bought Tylenol during the incidents of poisoning before the recall and bought it after it was reintroduced.

That it was deemed to be sabotage went a long way for Tylenol. People still talk about the negligence of Ford Explorer on car forums though. And time does seem "heal the wounds". Although Samsung doesn't have a lot of time on it's hands; imo.