11-12-2016 01:43 PM
63 123
tools
  1. avalvo's Avatar
    Looks like they will push a safety update on Nov 5th in Australia. I wonder if this will happen in the US?
    11-03-2016 06:53 PM
  2. jmnesq's Avatar
    Samsung to cripple its Galaxy Note 7 phone with forced update | afr.com

    Here's some proof of same.

    I'm obviously concerned that this is going to hit the US phones.
    troshs likes this.
    11-03-2016 07:27 PM
  3. Tim1954's Avatar
    It's almost a given, they can't risk any more people being burned...
    11-03-2016 08:33 PM
  4. Jude526's Avatar
    Those who don't give it up are being very risky and stupid. You just don't know what will happen and when. It's a phone for crying out loud! It's been recalled because there is a problem. Turn it in.
    11-03-2016 08:59 PM
  5. bay2view's Avatar
    In New Zealand, Samsung has advised - "From 18 November 2016 customers still using the Note 7 will no longer be able to connect to any New Zealand mobile network services to make calls, use data or send SMS messages."
    11-03-2016 09:14 PM
  6. jsgiv's Avatar
    Samsung to cripple its Galaxy Note 7 phone with forced update | afr.com

    Here's some proof of same.

    I'm obviously concerned that this is going to hit the US phones.
    With the national news reports now spreading this morning of exploding Samsung washing machines.... It's just a matter of time. Probably sooner than later.

    Samsung is now in full damage control...
    11-04-2016 06:28 AM
  7. Aquila's Avatar
    Let's not use this as yet another troll heavy thread please.
    cynth.hgn, mmsean and wdfrancis58 like this.
    11-04-2016 06:37 AM
  8. donm527's Avatar
    That's gonna suck for all the Note 7 owners in New Zealand.... guessing... 11 owners in New Zealand? lol.

    In New Zealand, Samsung has advised - "From 18 November 2016 customers still using the Note 7 will no longer be able to connect to any New Zealand mobile network services to make calls, use data or send SMS messages."
    Adaboy likes this.
    11-04-2016 06:42 AM
  9. donm527's Avatar
    Samsung recalls 2.8 million washing machines over risk of impact injuries

    With the national news reports now spreading this morning of exploding Samsung washing machines.... It's just a matter of time. Probably sooner than later.

    Samsung is now in full damage control...
    11-04-2016 07:31 AM
  10. fwinst's Avatar
    Samsung might have made the announcement, but it's the carriers that prompted the move. They were having problems getting everyone to turn in the devices. I would not be surprised to see this happen globally.
    11-04-2016 08:17 AM
  11. ultravisitor's Avatar
    I would not be surprised to see this happen globally.
    Indeed. I hope it does. And I hope that Samsung announces and enforces a cutoff date for refunds and exchanges of Note 7s.
    11-04-2016 10:17 AM
  12. m3lover1's Avatar
    Samsung to cripple its Galaxy Note 7 phone with forced update | afr.com

    Here's some proof of same.

    I'm obviously concerned that this is going to hit the US phones.
    Why are you concerned? Why hold on to a phone that is/will be a brick and worthless in the near future? No support, updates, possibly banned on networks here in the US. Definitely should get your money back for the phone while you still can.
    11-04-2016 10:19 AM
  13. jmnesq's Avatar
    Why are you concerned? Why hold on to a phone that is/will be a brick and worthless in the near future? No support, updates, possibly banned on networks here in the US. Definitely should get your money back for the phone while you still can.
    Why am I concerned? Because I am enjoying using the phone.
    Why hold on to a phone that is/will be a brick and worthless in the near future? Because I am enjoying using the phone. It is not a brick. It may be a brick in the future; that is my concern. Worthless? No. It will always be worth what I paid for it, and I can get that back from Sprint. It likely will be worth more -- check the eBay closed sales on the phone.
    No support, updates, possibly banned on networks here in the US. I don't care about support or updates. I'm happy with the phone as it is. If it is banned on a network, then I will return it to Sprint. However, that's what I'm concerned about.
    Definitely should get your money back for the phone while you still can. Why? Why can I not enjoy the phone for the foreseeable future, until the S8 is out? If it is taken off of the networks, I'll return it to Sprint. Until then, why am I not allowed, m3lover1, to enjoy my device?
    Why do you feel the need to come onto a Note thread and put those of us down who care to use the phone?
    dejanh, cynth.hgn and keepnitreel like this.
    11-04-2016 11:29 AM
  14. jmnesq's Avatar
    Indeed. I hope it does. And I hope that Samsung announces and enforces a cutoff date for refunds and exchanges of Note 7s.
    And how does this matter to you? Why would you want them to do this?
    mmsean likes this.
    11-04-2016 11:30 AM
  15. dejanh's Avatar
    I don't like the precedent that this sets. No telco or corporation should be allowed to dictate what happens to a product that a person owns. This reminds me of the Playstation OtherOS argument with Sony and other cases of similar nature. If I bought the product, or received it as a gift, or whatever it may be and I own it, I should not be dictated to in respect to how I am going to use it or what features I can and cannot use. Further to this, if telcos and corporations can do this unilaterally, what's stopping them employing the same tactic in other cases? Yeah, there are deeper reaching implications of this relating to control and ownership of the goods you paid for. More and more we do not own the things we buy.
    11-04-2016 12:49 PM
  16. donm527's Avatar
    If they are doing it because they are concerned for the owners safety then I say why not. At this point they could said we did what we needed, met our legal need, and wash their hands of it if they really thought there was nothing wrong and they were sabotaged by media. I might not like it if I had one in hand and refuse and don't believe there is an issue with blowing up but makes me think they must believe it enough to do something.

    I don't like the precedent that this sets. No telco or corporation should be allowed to dictate what happens to a product that a person owns. This reminds me of the Playstation OtherOS argument with Sony and other cases of similar nature. If I bought the product, or received it as a gift, or whatever it may be and I own it, I should not be dictated to in respect to how I am going to use it or what features I can and cannot use. Further to this, if telcos and corporations can do this unilaterally, what's stopping them employing the same tactic in other cases? Yeah, there are deeper reaching implications of this relating to control and ownership of the goods you paid for. More and more we do not own the things we buy.
    11-04-2016 01:09 PM
  17. Almeuit's Avatar
    If they are doing it because they are concerned for the owners safety then I say why not. At this point they could said we did what we needed, met our legal need, and wash their hands of it if they really thought there was nothing wrong and they were sabotaged by media. I might not like it if I had one in hand and refuse and don't believe there is an issue with blowing up but makes me think they must believe it enough to do something.
    This. If they were just doing it for some random reason sure but when it comes to safety it is another story.
    troshs and ultravisitor like this.
    11-04-2016 01:25 PM
  18. jmnesq's Avatar
    If they are doing it because they are concerned for the owners safety then I say why not. At this point they could said we did what we needed, met our legal need, and wash their hands of it if they really thought there was nothing wrong and they were sabotaged by media. I might not like it if I had one in hand and refuse and don't believe there is an issue with blowing up but makes me think they must believe it enough to do something.
    Litigation purposes.

    Should another one blow up, Samsung can point to the 500 alerts that are out there and advise that it was the assumption of the risk. Similarly, since Sprint/Verizon/AT&T/T-Mobile sells the items, they can also be named in a suit. If they are named, they point to all of the alerts that they have sent.

    Trust me, the only reason that any company would care -- at ALL -- about your safety -- is to make sure that you can continue to work and continue to pay your bill.
    mmsean and dejanh like this.
    11-04-2016 01:36 PM
  19. dejanh's Avatar
    This. If they were just doing it for some random reason sure but when it comes to safety it is another story.
    Random entities don't get to enforce safety. This is completely nonsensical. They have no legal obligation to do this, no liability. I see this as a matter of protecting access to basic services. This is on top of the fact that the whole argument of "protecting safety" is pretty tired, seeing as we are constantly getting our rights and freedoms taken away in the name of safety, and everyone is either ignorant of it or complicit in it. Anyway, once again let's just agree to disagree as we are not going to see eye-to-eye on this. I strongly believe that this is wrong behavior, and that it sets a precedent.
    11-04-2016 01:50 PM
  20. Almeuit's Avatar
    Random entities don't get to enforce safety. This is completely nonsensical.
    I wouldn't count the people who build the phone (the ones who said "oops we messed up and made a safety hazard") as a "Random Entity" in this case.
    7AndTRT likes this.
    11-04-2016 01:52 PM
  21. dejanh's Avatar
    I wouldn't count the people who build the phone (the ones who said "oops we messed up and made a safety hazard") as a "Random Entity" in this case.
    Then Samsung should find a way to recover those devices. In fact, in Canada this is precisely the stance of both Health Canada and any consumer protection agency - Samsung and only Samsung is responsible for these devices, period. Not telcos, not point of sale, nobody but Samsung. The New Zealand telcos or any other entities that decide to participate in unilateral blacklisting of IMEIs is complicit in an activity that they have nothing to do with, and in fact hurts their own image in the long run.
    wdfrancis58 likes this.
    11-04-2016 01:56 PM
  22. Almeuit's Avatar
    Then Samsung should find a way to recover those devices. In fact, in Canada this is precisely the stance of both Health Canada and any consumer protection agency - Samsung and only Samsung is responsible for these devices, period. Not telcos, not point of sale, nobody but Samsung.
    So you would be okay with them forcefully recovering it but not pushing an update? You're going on both sides here and it doesn't make sense. A software update is a violation to you but forcefully taking them isn't? They have tried to recover them by telling everyone over and over and over to turn them in due to safety hazards -- Not because they want to be evil and mean. They're taking billions of loss in this. If they want to gimp the device to help prevent further damage to their name even after telling people via notifications, text messages, emails ,etc. then I don't see a huge issue with it.

    I would agree there is an issue if it was something dumb or something malicious for them to get more money out of you but that isn't the case.
    11-04-2016 02:00 PM
  23. dejanh's Avatar
    So you would be okay with them forcefully recovering it but not pushing an update? You're going on both sides here and it doesn't make sense. A software update is a violation to you but forcefully taking them isn't? They have tried to recover them by telling everyone over and over and over to turn them in due to safety hazards -- Not because they want to be evil and mean. They're taking billions of loss in this. If they want to gimp the device to help prevent further damage to their name even after telling people via notifications, text messages, emails ,etc. then I don't see a huge issue with it.

    I would agree there is an issue if it was something dumb or something malicious for them to get more money out of you but that isn't the case.
    Or how about this alternative - offer a direct financial incentive to those that do not wish to return the device - some good-will, maybe a 25% discount off of the upcoming S8 or the future Note8 device. Or maybe give everyone a free Gear S3. Work something out. No, what they want to do is have everyone return their phones for some minuscule compensation and without an adequate replacement. I don't agree even by a long shot that Samsung has done everything they can to make this process effective. Measly $25 for the hassle if you refund or $100 off of a year-old device with less functionality but nearly the same price? I could go on how they could do this much better than they are but it really comes down to this - Samsung wants the users and telcos to do the work so they can minimize the cost of the recall. Like I said, let's just agree to disagree.
    wdfrancis58 and cynth.hgn like this.
    11-04-2016 02:07 PM
  24. dario12v's Avatar
    Or how about this alternative - offer a direct financial incentive to those that do not wish to return the device - some good-will, maybe a 25% discount off of the upcoming S8 or the future Note8 device. Or maybe give everyone a free Gear S3. Work something out. No, what they want to do is have everyone return their phones for some minuscule compensation and without an adequate replacement. I don't agree even by a long shot that Samsung has done everything they can to make this process effective. Measly $25 for the hassle if you refund or $100 off of a year-old device with less functionality but nearly the same price? I could go on how they could do this much better than they are but it really comes down to this - Samsung wants the users and telcos to do the work so they can minimize the cost of the recall. Like I said, let's just agree to disagree.
    Exactly
    Agree 100%
    We should at least get s7 edge loaners until the S8 arrives
    And keep our upgrade eligibility, so we can use it on the s8

    If they do that, I'll return it immediately

    Try bricking (black-listing) these phones in The United States
    And you will have a legal battle in your hands, samsung
    athenatp and mmsean like this.
    11-04-2016 02:25 PM
  25. Almeuit's Avatar
    Or how about this alternative - offer a direct financial incentive to those that do not wish to return the device - some good-will, maybe a 25% discount off of the upcoming S8 or the future Note8 device. Or maybe give everyone a free Gear S3. Work something out. No, what they want to do is have everyone return their phones for some minuscule compensation and without an adequate replacement. I don't agree even by a long shot that Samsung has done everything they can to make this process effective. Measly $25 for the hassle if you refund or $100 off of a year-old device with less functionality but nearly the same price? I could go on how they could do this much better than they are but it really comes down to this - Samsung wants the users and telcos to do the work so they can minimize the cost of the recall. Like I said, let's just agree to disagree.
    Who said they weren't offering anything? Sounds like you're assuming things .
    11-04-2016 02:47 PM
63 123

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-03-2016, 08:56 PM
  2. How do you move notes from Lg nexus 5 to LgG5
    By AC Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-03-2016, 06:49 PM
  3. can the ZTE n 817 use a flash light app
    By AC Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-03-2016, 06:35 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-03-2016, 06:28 PM
  5. How do i exit child mode on the stream machine tablet
    By AC Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-03-2016, 06:14 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD