Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | ... | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | ... | 85
tripp
3824 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #1647982 9-Oct-2016 13:54
Send private message

kiwired23: Looks like they might be a hot topic for the forseeable future. http://www.theverge.com/2016/10/8/13214272/samsung-galaxy-note-7-fire-replacement-battery-minnesota-again

 

 

 

Hang on, how the hell does a 13 year old afford a note7 lol.


 
 
 

GoodSync. Easily back up and sync your files with GoodSync. Simple and secure file backup and synchronisation software will ensure that your files are never lost (affiliate link).
Dratsab
3939 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #1648019 9-Oct-2016 15:06
Send private message

ibuksh: As unlucky as it might sound for Samsung:

 

http://www.gsmarena.com/galaxy_note7_deemed_safe_catches_fire_on_a_plane-news-20902.php

 

This doesnt seem to be going in favor of Samsung 

 

I'm a little skeptical about some of this. The first picture article shows is of a burnt looking phone above which it says "the picture below purportedly shows the phone after smoke stopped coming out of it". The handset owner apparently quickly threw it on the floor. A colleague of his later went back onto the plane to retrieve some personal belongings and "noticed that the phone burned through the carpet and managed to scorch the subfloor of the plane".

 

So, in a nutshell the article is purporting:
- a phone started smoking on a plane
- its owner threw it on the floor
- the plane was evacuated
- the phone was left to do whatever (no indication of fire extinguishers being used or emergency services being called)
- a passenger (colleague of phone owner) was allowed to re-board the plane while the phone was still in-situ
- this passenger claimed a hole had been burnt through the carpet and there was burning on the sub-floor

 

Meanwhile the picture of the offending phone, allegedly, on carpet besides an aircraft seat shows no evidence of carpet being burnt through. Did someone risk moving a potentially extremely hot device away from the area where it burnt through the carpet in order to take that nice photo?

 

Scouring through a number of news articles about this, it seems the passengers' wife (who wasn't actually on the plane and received a phone call later telling her what happened) is the one doing all the talking.

 

Meanwhile Southwest have a slightly different version: "Southwest Airlines Co. spokesman Brad Hawkins said a passenger reported smoke coming from a Samsung device and that everyone got off the plane through the main cabin door. No one was injured in the evacuation, but the plane’s carpet suffered minor damage where the phone was dropped, fire officials said."

 

I think the last two points above are most likely BS. That makes me wonder if it is actually a new phone that's caught on fire or if it's someone looking for their 5 minutes of fame. [/conspiracytheory]


kiwired23
90 posts

Master Geek




Geektastic
17811 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #1648237 9-Oct-2016 21:33
Send private message

kiwired23: And a third (with a conspiratorial turn): http://www.theverge.com/2016/10/9/13215728/samsung-galaxy-note-7-third-fire-smoke-inhalation

 

 

 

Would NZ carriers do what the US carriers are doing and offer full refunds etc?






eracode

Smpl Mnmlst
7502 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified
Trusted
Subscriber

  #1648250 9-Oct-2016 22:41
Send private message

Geektastic:

 

kiwired23: And a third (with a conspiratorial turn): http://www.theverge.com/2016/10/9/13215728/samsung-galaxy-note-7-third-fire-smoke-inhalation

 

 

 

Would NZ carriers do what the US carriers are doing and offer full refunds etc?

 

 

Surely it's driven by Samsung, not the carriers. Why would the carriers want to do that?





Sometimes I just sit and think. Other times I just sit.


richms
26749 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Subscriber

  #1648253 9-Oct-2016 23:10
Send private message

eracode:

 

Surely it's driven by Samsung, not the carriers. Why would the carriers want to do that?

 

 

Because if the carrier sold it in their store, they have the CGA burden on them.

 

 





Richard rich.ms

eracode

Smpl Mnmlst
7502 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified
Trusted
Subscriber

  #1648262 10-Oct-2016 04:20
Send private message

richms:

 

eracode:

 

Surely it's driven by Samsung, not the carriers. Why would the carriers want to do that?

 

 

Because if the carrier sold it in their store, they have the CGA burden on them.

 

 

 

 

Wouldn't that result in a reactive stance rather than the proactive one apparently taken by the US carriers?





Sometimes I just sit and think. Other times I just sit.




freitasm
BDFL - Memuneh
77095 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator
ID Verified
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

  #1648279 10-Oct-2016 07:57
Send private message

I have now seen reports of four replacement phones catching fire. I wouldn't touch this with a stick.




Please support Geekzone by subscribing, or using one of our referral links: Dosh referral: 00001283 | Sharesies | Goodsync | Mighty Ape | Backblaze

 

freitasm on Keybase | My technology disclosure

 

 

 

 

 

 


ibuksh
524 posts

Ultimate Geek


  #1648282 10-Oct-2016 08:03
Send private message

freitasm: I have now seen reports of four replacement phones catching fire. I wouldn't touch this with a stick.

 

Lets hope that our Telcos are proactive and are in liaison with Samsung right now about a "Total Recall" 


eracode

Smpl Mnmlst
7502 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified
Trusted
Subscriber

  #1648284 10-Oct-2016 08:06
Send private message

freitasm: I have now seen reports of four replacement phones catching fire. I wouldn't touch this with a stick.

 

Yeah but that's not a lot of help to those of us who bought them in good faith.





Sometimes I just sit and think. Other times I just sit.


Geektastic
17811 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #1648306 10-Oct-2016 08:53
Send private message

tripp:

AT&T Stops sales of Note7 Again


http://www.androidpolice.com/2016/10/09/att-is-the-first-us-operator-to-halt-all-sales-of-the-safe-galaxy-note7/


 


http://www.theverge.com/2016/10/9/13219054/att-samsung-galaxy-note-7-stop-sales


 



Seems fairly clear that the carrier itself has decided this, not Samsung. They won't even supply "safe" replacements now.





tripp
3824 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #1648319 10-Oct-2016 09:10
Send private message

Geektastic:
tripp:

 

AT&T Stops sales of Note7 Again

 

 

 

http://www.androidpolice.com/2016/10/09/att-is-the-first-us-operator-to-halt-all-sales-of-the-safe-galaxy-note7/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.theverge.com/2016/10/9/13219054/att-samsung-galaxy-note-7-stop-sales

 

 

 

 

 



Seems fairly clear that the carrier itself has decided this, not Samsung. They won't even supply "safe" replacements now.

 

Yes it is AT&T doing it, but they are said to be the 3rd biggest customer of samsungs.


DaveB
1139 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user


  #1648332 10-Oct-2016 09:19
Send private message

freitasm: I have now seen reports of four replacement phones catching fire. I wouldn't touch this with a stick.

 

 

 

It's interesting that (I believe) in all 4 cases, the affected users are refusing to hand back their phones to Samsung. I wonder why?

 

 

 

In the Kentucky case Samsung paid the guy to have it X-rayed, but again he would not allow the phone out of his possession. I find it quite all quite strange.


Geektastic
17811 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #1648354 10-Oct-2016 09:50
Send private message

DaveB:

 

freitasm: I have now seen reports of four replacement phones catching fire. I wouldn't touch this with a stick.

 

 

 

It's interesting that (I believe) in all 4 cases, the affected users are refusing to hand back their phones to Samsung. I wonder why?

 

 

 

In the Kentucky case Samsung paid the guy to have it X-rayed, but again he would not allow the phone out of his possession. I find it quite all quite strange.

 

 

That is odd.

 

For the US instances, it may be a desire to hold on to evidence so that you can sue Samsung in due course and retire...






1 | ... | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | ... | 85
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic





News and reviews »

One New Zealand Extends 3G Switch-off Date
Posted 11-Apr-2024 08:56


Amazon Echo Hub Review
Posted 10-Apr-2024 18:57


Epson Launches New Versatile A4 Desktop Scanners
Posted 10-Apr-2024 15:31


Motorola Mobility Launches New Android Phones in New Zealand
Posted 10-Apr-2024 14:59


Logitech G Unveils the PRO X 60 Gaming Keyboard
Posted 9-Apr-2024 19:01


Logitech Unveils Signature Slim Keyboard and Combo
Posted 9-Apr-2024 13:33


ExpressVPN Launches Aircove Go Portable Router With Built-in VPN
Posted 26-Mar-2024 21:25


Shure MoveMic Review
Posted 25-Mar-2024 12:47


reMarkable 2 Launches at JB Hi-Fi New Zealand
Posted 20-Mar-2024 08:36


Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra review
Posted 19-Mar-2024 11:37


Google Nest Wifi Pro Review
Posted 16-Mar-2024 11:28


Samsung Galaxy A55 5G and Galaxy A35 5G
Posted 12-Mar-2024 12:41


Cricut EasyPress Mini Zen Blue launches at Spotlight New Zealand
Posted 12-Mar-2024 12:32


Logitech Introduces MX Brio Webcam
Posted 12-Mar-2024 12:24


HP Unveils Broadest Consumer Portfolio of AI-Enhanced Laptops
Posted 3-Mar-2024 18:09









Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.







Backblaze unlimited backup