10-22-2016 06:47 PM
82 123 ...
tools
  1. pdangcil's Avatar
    Aside from not being able to fly with it... What are the other downsides?
    10-16-2016 09:52 PM
  2. E Padilla's Avatar
    There is a small chance your house might burn down? I'm not sure the extent. Actually, your device may well be fine and dandy but Samsung will do a kill switch on it sooner or later that will force you to change it.
    10-16-2016 10:00 PM
  3. pdangcil's Avatar
    Kill switch??? Is that ethical? I mean it's a recall. I can choose not to pursue it, right?
    10-16-2016 10:08 PM
  4. James Beam's Avatar
    It sounds like they will be pretty much useless as a phone in the near future.... https://www.reddit.com/r/GalaxyNote7...isting_note_7/
    10-16-2016 10:10 PM
  5. pdangcil's Avatar
    Well.... ****. FML. I hate my life. ๐Ÿ™๐Ÿ˜ข
    10-16-2016 10:13 PM
  6. JohnT3's Avatar
    They already disabled the oculus app so that's already one chop off the block. I was wondering the same thing though. Is it possible to hang on to it for a while and still use? I keep thinking if everyone turns them in and they're all disposed of, maybe they'd have some sort of historical value. lol, that probably sounds stupid
    10-16-2016 10:17 PM
  7. pdangcil's Avatar
    Ha! Historical Value!!! ๐Ÿ˜‚
    It may be worth a ton of money in the future. Sort of like the Apple II computer.
    10-16-2016 10:22 PM
  8. jackash0912's Avatar
    It sounds like they will be pretty much useless as a phone in the near future.... https://www.reddit.com/r/GalaxyNote7...isting_note_7/
    If you read the comments on that the OP says his phone was accidentally placed in a lost/stolen list and service has since returned to his N7. I'm on Verizon and no text like that and service still works.
    Cary Quinn and g2manhou like this.
    10-16-2016 10:50 PM
  9. team420's Avatar
    Honestly... what will happen? NOTHING... maybe Sammy will disable it, but I doubt it... what they (and carriers) Def will not do is support it.

    For someone like me, that's generally fine, but for someone that wants security updates, and general os updates, it's a stumbling block...

    Basically, the phone will be obsolete in 3 - 6 months...
    10-16-2016 11:38 PM
  10. TomOfTx's Avatar
    What legal basis would Samsung or any carrier use to remotely disable a phone that they do not own (for those of us who paid full price and not on some payment plan/lease plan with a carrier). Sure, a carrier could block the use of the device based on the IMEI number. But to actually do anything to physically damage the ability to use the device or blacklist it says major lawsuit. All this fear mongering about what Samsung or a carrier will do to disable the Note 7 is total nonsense. Maybe in some other country, like South Korea, with no constitutional rights afforded to their citizens, but it is not going to happen here in the USA. I dare a carrier like AT&T to try and do such a thing, which they won't because they could care less what phone I use on their network provided the service is paid for.

    I am hanging on to my N7 for now, even though I am using another phone as well (iPhone 7+). No rush to turn mine in. Maybe I will, maybe I won't. A $1000 for a phone is no big deal to me. I am mainly interested in finding out more what the actual defect (if any really exists) of the N7. I am just not one who takes the advice of some unqualified bureaucrats at the CPSC. If Samsung has not been able to replicate the supposed defect with the phone, then does it really even exist at all? Eventually I may turn my phone in only because something else better will be available.
    10-17-2016 12:09 AM
  11. hondatech39's Avatar
    i am on Verizon and when i went to choose another phone to upgrade to.There was a note on there for anyone with a note 7 will be able to upgrade to another phone.They will send a special box to return the note 7.If they didn't get it back they will charge you for the full cost of the phone.So unless you paid for it in full and not on a payment plan you will have to pay for it at some point if you keep it.There was not date when they want them back by.
    10-17-2016 12:30 AM
  12. TomOfTx's Avatar
    Pretty far fetched to single out one device versus any lithium based device in terms of being banned from possessing.
    kevinpleasants likes this.
    10-17-2016 12:32 AM
  13. Setzer's Avatar
    I'm sitting here with my Note 7 in the box. I just got mine last week and had placed the order for it just before the news came out about the one catching fire on the SW flight. I was really looking forward to using this phone. I've taken it out of the box a few times and have turned it on and played around with it....which I probably shouldn't have. I had decided on swapping it out for a V20 but part of me says screw it and just keep it. The tough thing will be not getting any updates for it, like Nougat, and stuff like GearVR not working. Traveling isn't an issue for me since I don't fly anywhere. It's a tough call....but even though mine may not be one of the defective ones I'd hate to go to bed one night with this thing on my nightstand right next to me and it go up in flames. It's just not worth the chance.
    aximtreo likes this.
    10-17-2016 12:38 AM
  14. James Beam's Avatar
    If you read the comments on that the OP says his phone was accidentally placed in a lost/stolen list and service has since returned to his N7. I'm on Verizon and no text like that and service still works.
    True. But I can see this eventually happening to all of them, because the carriers won't want the liability of letting people continue to use it on their networks. Even though they did their best to warn people to turn them in and wash their hands of them, if someone were to get injured or die, it's almost guaranteed someone will try and sue. With the excuse being, "Well they never deactivated my phone, so I just assumed it was ok to keep using it!" I'm sure they'll give fair warning before they shut em down. I'm guessing the phone will still have access to 911, but that'll be about it.
    10-17-2016 07:16 AM
  15. Aquila's Avatar
    What legal basis would Samsung or any carrier use to remotely disable a phone that they do not own (for those of us who paid full price and not on some payment plan/lease plan with a carrier). Sure, a carrier could block the use of the device based on the IMEI number. But to actually do anything to physically damage the ability to use the device or blacklist it says major lawsuit. All this fear mongering about what Samsung or a carrier will do to disable the Note 7 is total nonsense. Maybe in some other country, like South Korea, with no constitutional rights afforded to their citizens, but it is not going to happen here in the USA. I dare a carrier like AT&T to try and do such a thing, which they won't because they could care less what phone I use on their network provided the service is paid for.

    I am hanging on to my N7 for now, even though I am using another phone as well (iPhone 7+). No rush to turn mine in. Maybe I will, maybe I won't. A $1000 for a phone is no big deal to me. I am mainly interested in finding out more what the actual defect (if any really exists) of the N7. I am just not one who takes the advice of some unqualified bureaucrats at the CPSC. If Samsung has not been able to replicate the supposed defect with the phone, then does it really even exist at all? Eventually I may turn my phone in only because something else better will be available.
    South Korea has a constitution, a three branch government and is a democratic republic. Aside from fixing that error, I'll just advise you to move all the political nonsense to the politics section.

    Thanks!
    10-17-2016 07:21 AM
  16. GrooveRite's Avatar
    Aside from not being able to fly with it... What are the other downsides?
    If God forbid you're device catches fire and either/both injures someone or burns something down.....you'll be hit with 'gross negligence' in court and lose badly.

    gross negligence
    n. carelessness in reckless disregard for the safety or lives of others, which is so great it appears to be a conscious violation of other people's rights to safety. It is more than simple inadvertence, but it is just shy of being intentionally evil. If one has borrowed or contracted to take care of another's property, then gross negligence is the failure to actively take the care one would of his/her own property. If gross negligence is found by the trier of fact (judge or jury), it can result in the award of punitive damages on top of general and special damages. (See: negligence, damages, punitive damages)
    10-17-2016 07:56 AM
  17. fragologist's Avatar
    If the possibility of your house burning down is not enough to get rid of it then no reason will be good enough. How about the fact that an update will come out to possibly brick the phone and you're just wasting your money. Just go get yourself a new phone with an extra$100 incentive.... There is no reason to be stubborn about this.
    Michelle Haag, sean_4d8 and Feldon like this.
    10-17-2016 08:09 AM
  18. rushmore's Avatar
    If Samsung corporate reps are to be believed (not sure on that):

    1. Flight ban is forever
    2. Several stealth updates planned to essentially kill the devices (after warnings)
    3. Zero customer or warranty support (only return help)
    4. IMEI codes blocked

    Will some still get through? Yep, but Samsung must show due diligence to avoid huge class action suits if something bad were to actually happen. I still think this has been blown way out of proportion. Especially since Apple has had at least two fires on planes. Where is the safety focus for that? If the litmus is one Note 7 burned up on a plane- why the ever living heck is Apple getting away from the same standard? Ditto for Ecigs that had at least eleven burn events on planes.

    IMO, the media (in general) is essentially stupid and the public are lemmings following them over a cliff. Well, the media just watches the public go over the cliff, hiding in their bunker twenty fathoms below sea level.
    10-17-2016 08:17 AM
  19. LeoRex's Avatar
    Where is the safety focus for that? If the litmus is one Note 7 burned up on a plane-
    That was just the highest profile case. The CPSC announced that there were 22 other incidents of replacement Notes failing in the US alone. One of those happened to happen on a plane, and had that been the ONLY case, we wouldn't be where we are today.

    So basically, they were averaging about 1 sparked up Note 7 a day since the replacement phones made it into the hands of users.
    10-17-2016 11:29 AM
  20. Jaycemiskel's Avatar
    That was just the highest profile case. The CPSC announced that there were 22 other incidents of replacement Notes failing in the US alone. One of those happened to happen on a plane, and had that been the ONLY case, we wouldn't be where we are today.

    So basically, they were averaging about 1 sparked up Note 7 a day since the replacement phones made it into the hands of users.
    I thought it said there were 22 cases since the recall. Didn't actually specify that they were replacement units, right?
    10-17-2016 11:41 AM
  21. felloffthetruck's Avatar
    It's just a matter of time before you'll will be holding the new Samsung Note 7 Brick/Paperweight.
    sean_4d8 and Feldon like this.
    10-17-2016 11:43 AM
  22. LeoRex's Avatar
    I thought it said there were 22 cases since the recall. Didn't actually specify that they were replacement units, right?
    23... the CPSC doesn't get into much detail on the specifics. But had all the other incidents other than the SW flight been on the original, pre-recall Note 7s, things would most likely be different. Safe to say that most all of those were replacements, based on Samsung canceling the Note 7.
    Laura Knotek likes this.
    10-17-2016 11:51 AM
  23. Jaycemiskel's Avatar
    23... the CPSC doesn't get into much detail on the specifics. But had all the other incidents other than the SW flight been on the original, pre-recall Note 7s, things would most likely be different. Safe to say that most all of those were replacements, based on Samsung canceling the Note 7.
    Maybe they were all replacement units. Still a very small number. Something that there haven't been any since the cancelation and the problem can't be replicated. I will say, I'm not worried about my phone burning up any more than I am with any other phone. I'll have to return it because of no support, but I would have no problem keeping it if given the choice.
    10-17-2016 12:06 PM
  24. LeoRex's Avatar
    Maybe they were all replacement units. Still a very small number. Something that there haven't been any since the cancelation and the problem can't be replicated. I will say, I'm not worried about my phone burning up any more than I am with any other phone. I'll have to return it because of no support, but I would have no problem keeping it if given the choice.
    Well, once the story hit, and the CPSC and Samsung issued the stop order, I assume that a substantial percentage of Note 7 owners powered theirs down.
    Laura Knotek and benjamminh like this.
    10-17-2016 12:12 PM
  25. TomOfTx's Avatar
    South Korea has a constitution, a three branch government and is a democratic republic. Aside from fixing that error, I'll just advise you to move all the political nonsense to the politics section.

    Thanks!
    This is not about politics. It is about the 4th Amendment protection citizens of the USA enjoy which would prevent a private company like Samsung from unlawfully seizing or disabling private property without any judicial review. This is why I say it is ridiculous to think Samsung or any carrier here could legally disable someones private property such as the Note 7 phone. I own my Note 7 and the recall does not make it illegal to possess the device. Sure, it is banned from bringing on an airplane and such, but firearms are banned too. It does not prevent me from legally possessing the Note 7 or a firearm at this time.

    My reference to South Korea not having any constitutional rights was a typo. I meant to say North Korea. Could apply to any country with no constitutional rights against unlawful search or seizure of private property.
    10-17-2016 01:23 PM
82 123 ...

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-15-2016, 10:16 PM
  2. If the Note 7 could pick an encore song . . .
    By SteelGator in forum Samsung Galaxy Note 7
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 10-17-2016, 01:49 PM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-17-2016, 05:07 AM
  4. What are lollipop trusted certificates
    By AC Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-16-2016, 09:34 PM
  5. Green box keeps moving around screen how do i get rid of it
    By AC Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-16-2016, 08:00 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD