Samsung Galaxy Note 4 Batteries Are Being Recalled For Overheating Risk (theverge.com) 77
According to The Verge, over 10,000 batteries for the Galaxy Note 4 are being recalled for risk of overheating that could lead to burns or fires. Given last year's Note 7 fiasco, this recall sure doesn't sound good. It is, however, far more limited than the Note 7 recall and doesn't appear to be Samsung's fault. The Verge reports: Only phones refurbished through AT&T's insurance program and handled by FedEx Supply Chain are impacted by the recall. Some of the refurbished phones apparently ended up with "counterfeit" batteries that include anomalies that could make them overheat. Fortunately, the Note 4 has a replaceable battery, so this recall isn't as big of a deal. Owners can just buy a new battery to use in their phone until the recall is taken care of. FedEx is currently sending out replacement batteries as well as boxes for returning the recalled phones. "FedEx Supply Chain is conducting this recall of non-genuine Samsung batteries as some of them are counterfeit," the spokesperson said. "The refurbishment program was managed by FedEx Supply Chain and operated independently of Samsung. Any affected owners should contact FedEx Supply Chain at 1-800-338-0163 or go online at www.exchangemybattery.com for more information." There's only been one report of a phone overheating and no damage to people or property because of it.
Re: (Score:3)
It's summer, and people are overheating and dying. Need to recall the human race.
Some Christians call it rapture.
Re: (Score:3)
That's why I only believe in Z! Kneel before Z!
Re: (Score:2)
That's why I only believe in Z! Kneel before Z!
Dracarys!
Re: (Score:2)
I was referring to General Zod in Superman II, I don't know what the fuck you're talking about.
Re: (Score:2)
I was referring to General Zod in Superman II, I don't know what the fuck you're talking about.
I understood your reference... Dracarys! is High Valerian for "Dragonfire" and it's what Daenerys Targaryen says to encourage her dragons to spew forth a flaming hell fire that destroys anything in its path.. Including people that refuse to bend the knee to her or are bending knees to the wrong ruler.
Re: (Score:2)
Still don't know what the fuck you're talking about. Is it Harry Potter? Lord of the Rings?
Re: (Score:2)
Still don't know what the fuck you're talking about. Is it Harry Potter? Lord of the Rings?
... Game of Thrones.
Re: (Score:2)
What's that? Is it like musical chairs?
Time for The Boss to do a rewrite... (Score:4, Funny)
Romeo and Juliet, Samsung and Delilah...ooh-ooh, FIRE.
Re: (Score:2)
Springsteen wrote it, my friend. He actually wrote it for Elvis, who unfortunately died before he could record it.
Look it up.
Bad Journalism 101 - Headline is _wrong_ (Score:5, Informative)
Samsung batteries are not being recalled, Samsung had nothing to do with it. The headline is completely misleading and the summary doesn't do anything to dispel that until three sentences in. If anything it tries to reinforce that it's a "Samsung" problem before saying it's not. Try:
"Counterfeit batteries for the Samsung Note 4 are being recalled"
Or better yet:
"AT&T and FedEx recall counterfeit batteries for Samsung Note 4"
But neither of those are as click-baity.
Re: (Score:1)
The title is vague, and arguably misleading. A good many readers, perhaps most, would interpret that title as meaning batteries manufactured by or installed by Samsung itself. How people are likely to interpret a headline is probably the most important metric of its quality, even if it's not "technically" wrong. If the article really is talking about counterfeits, then the title probably should have used the phrase "counterfeit batteries" or equivalent.
Samsung should use this (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Samsung should use this (Score:4, Interesting)
Also as this is showing, people will try to cheap out when getting a replacement battery, Thus having a situation where their product is dangerous. While they may not be legally liable, they get bad press when the article says Samsung galaxy note overheating and burning people. A non replaceable battery reduces the chance that people will cheap out and make their product dangerous.
I recall some stories blaming Apple for their phone catching on fire, while the user was found to use some cheap 3rd party charger that more or less just connected the USB cable directly to the AC house power socket.
Re: (Score:1)
While they may not be legally liable, they get bad press when the article says Samsung galaxy note overheating and burning people.
Why would the article mention that Samsung is at fault when it's not a Samsung battery? The battery maker would lose its reputation and its business.
Besides, integrating battery into the phone was/is a stupid idea. CPUs and GPUs get hot very quickly (for example while playing 3D games). A user replaceable battery would be in a separate compartment therefore it would have a lower chance getting hot when the CPU+GPU are hot because plastic is not a good conductor of heat.
I recall some stories blaming Apple for their phone catching on fire, while the user was found to use some cheap 3rd party charger
Some stories may blame Apple, but if t
Re: (Score:2)
They would imply that it was Samsung, because
1. It is a big company
2. It has a near fanatical loyal followers.
3. History with the Note 7
4. Make more people scared, so they read the article.
Re: (Score:2)
Also as this is showing, people will try to cheap out when getting a replacement battery
I sort-of did when I had an S4. Went on to Amazon, put in the model number, and there were bunch of options. I got the best combo of price and shipping. Turns out that battery wasn't quite the same as the original. After some time, I kept finding that the battery life of my phone seemed a bit random, and sometimes it would get a little hot. Finally figured out that it might be the battery, marked it clearly, and then paid attention. Sure enough, the new battery was the flaky one. A close examination showed
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Samsung did take note. By making batteries non user replaceable they control the supply chain and this scenario of counterfeit batteries is avoided.
It's a shame the facts of this case doesn't fit the narrative you want to apply.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
False. Just like in this case where they are recalling dangerous batteries they still would have recalled the battery. Postage makes up some 75% of the cost of the recall.
But since you missed the fact that we're now talking about the Note 4, and that it has a different failure mechanism to the Note 7 if you want to talk about both scenarios at once it just means that your post will be wrong regardless of how you spin it.
Why I never trust refurbished products.. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Earlier this year, I bought a refurbished battery for my LG phone on Am
Re: (Score:3)
Nowadays when I buy Apple products, I pretty much always buy refurbished. You save 10-15 percent, and you get the new warranty. You can even buy the same extended warranty as a new product, at the same price, if you wish.
I've had good luck with Apple's refurbished program.
+1 for removable batteries (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
5 years? LOL! That's probably the best case scenario. Batteries die within a year (if subjected to heavy CPU/GPU tasks)
Perhaps a phone is not the hammer you're looking for?
Re: (Score:3)
It's been discussed here a lot; apart from stinging your customers for replacement costs, there are actually some very good reasons - lower BoM and manufacturing costs, smaller volume (so thinner phone) for a given capacity plus potential for greater reliability even waterproofing (can have a hermetic case more easily if you glue it shut).
Unfortunately actually getting all those benefits requires competent & like-minded bosses, marketeers, engineers and suppliers.
(Of the sort that used to exist at Nokia
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why? When the majority cost is in the shipping back and forth then the cost is similar. In any case if the batteries were sealed in the Note 4 we wouldn't have this problem as users would not have counterfeit batteries in their phones.
Re: (Score:2)
Touche. Though the first point I think is a bit off because it's missing the labor involved in replacing the battery in the returned units.
Re: (Score:2)
it's missing the labor involved
You should check out a Chinese / Taiwanese factory before you think the labour quote is missing in the figure ;-)
No seriously, the largest component cost of this would be the shipping from the USA back to the factory. Shipping from China / South Korea is subsidised so that cost is worn mostly by the USPS thanks to an ancient treaty.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, Note 7 would have been cheaper if they could have swapped the batteries, but would it have been cheaper than gluing in the batteries in the entire Note product line? If you make all your devices with removable batteries, they all cost more money, are harder to waterproof, thicker, and customers can stick dodgy spares into them anyway. If you glue batteries in the entire line, sure, maybe you have one expensive recall, but does it cost more than not doing that? I've got no idea, but I think it's simpli
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I agree somewhat. But thin is nice if you're going to put a case on it. My wife went cheap on her latest phone, and it's noticeably thick once you put a decent case on it. The more expensive ones tend to not have that problem - I find my S7 with a case is a really nice thickness. Sure, you can also not put a case on your phone - I survived 3 years without one - but a case is not bad insurance.
Likewise, the need for water-resistant phones is a bit of insurance, but that need is heavily dependent on
This is not news (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Like soldered RAM, they are designed for planned obsolescence, another money gouging trick.
Counterfeit batteries (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)