Related
Block service: Urgent fw update and software update in your note.
Samsung is pushing a update that makes your note 7 unusable!
Confirmed by samsung holland..
Maybe package disable pro can do it...
I don't actually see this as a problem considering the devices have been recalled worldwide.
escobar035 said:
Block service: Urgent fw update and software update in your note.
Samsung is pushing a update that makes your note 7 unusable!
Confirmed by samsung holland..
Maybe package disable pro can do it...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why would you want to prevent Samsung from disabling a dangerous device they sold? Have you not been offered a return of your cash by Samsung? IN a few months Samsung will release its S8 series then we can take a look at that.
I need someone to explain why its imperative to keep ownership of a dangerous device that has been recalled twice losing the company multi billions of euros?
Ryland
They need to ban the iPhone too. I mean who would be comfortable knowing someone was carrying a device so dangerous it has been REPORTED it spontaneously explodes even when off?
The iPhone is DANGEROUS people. Ban it! I read about it in the news:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-college-student-s-iPhone-explodes-class.html
The Phone Company said:
*snip*
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Ryland Johnson said:
Why would you want to prevent Samsung from disabling a dangerous device they sold? Have you not been offered a return of your cash by Samsung? IN a few months Samsung will release its S8 series then we can take a look at that.
I need someone to explain why its imperative to keep ownership of a dangerous device that has been recalled twice losing the company multi billions of euros?
Ryland
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not so much that it is imperative to keep ownership of these devices. It's the point that it is a voluntary recall, and Samsung sending out an update that disables these devices makes it a bit involuntary. Plus, if someone has paid the phone in full, don't they legally own it? For Samsung to disable it in that situation is a bit much I'd say. This is of course all regardless of whether it is a good idea to keep the phone or not, but that's not the discussion here.
The Phone Company said:
They need to ban the iPhone too. I mean who would be comfortable knowing someone was carrying a device so dangerous it has been REPORTED it spontaneously explodes even when off?
The iPhone is DANGEROUS people. Ban it! I read about it in the news:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-college-student-s-iPhone-explodes-class.html
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have to fight one battle at a time. I am mourning the loss of my Note 7. I don't want to be rude and certainly not confrontational when I write I don't care if the fruity brand goes bust and ceases to trade, no concern of mine. What is of concern to me is my families welfare to that end I hope I don't see someone with a Note 7 on an aircraft or public transport.
Every opportunity has been offered to return this defective device. There are zero excuses if an owner keeps one and causes others damage.
Ryland
---------- Post added at 10:48 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:39 AM ----------
svache said:
It's not so much that it is imperative to keep ownership of these devices. It's the point that it is a voluntary recall, and Samsung sending out an update that disables these devices makes it a bit involuntary. Plus, if someone has paid the phone in full, don't they legally own it? For Samsung to disable it in that situation is a bit much I'd say. This is of course all regardless of whether it is a good idea to keep the phone or not, but that's not the discussion here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So its morally incorrect for Samsung to block the use of a defective dangerous device but not morally incorrect for us to use them in public? Double standards me thinks?
Samsung are NOT going to take away your device. You can still own one as long as the recall where you live is not[/U] official, its the carriers who will block the phone etc. Samsung will not honour further warranties nor offer updates.
Can you explain why you would not want to cooperate with Samsung over the recall?
Ryland
I just noticed you live in the USA where the recall is official.
Ryland Johnson said:
I have to fight one battle at a time. I am mourning the loss of my Note 7. I don't want to be rude and certainly not confrontational when I write I don't care if the fruity brand goes bust and ceases to trade, no concern of mine. What is of concern to me is my families welfare to that end I hope I don't see someone with a Note 7 on an aircraft or public transport.
Every opportunity has been offered to return this defective device. There are zero excuses if an owner keeps one and causes others damage.
Ryland
---------- Post added at 10:48 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:39 AM ----------
So its morally incorrect for Samsung to block the use of a defective dangerous device but not morally incorrect for us to use them in public? Double standards me thinks?
Samsung are NOT going to take away your device. You can still own one as long as the recall where you live is not[/U] official, its the carriers who will block the phone etc. Samsung will not honour further warranties nor offer updates.
Can you explain why you would not want to cooperate with Samsung over the recall?
Ryland
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One good reason: I don't get my replacement phone until at least 10/28 because thats the day Pixel XL's ship.
svache said:
It's the point that it is a voluntary recall, and Samsung sending out an update that disables these devices makes it a bit involuntary.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not a voluntary recall in the United States since Thursday at 3PM Eastern time (October 13 2016), it's mandatory:
https://www.cpsc.gov/Recalls/2017/s...-Additional-Incidents-with-Replacement-Phones
If Samsung were to issue a "magic bullet" over the air that does brick/disable the Note 7 models that people are refusing to return as part of the worldwide recall process all that does is force the customers to do it anyway: they're not going to be happy with a dead/bricked device but they still have the option - even after all that BS they've gone through - to return it to Samsung and get a refund on their costs.
Again, I don't see a negative here.
Ryland Johnson said:
So its morally incorrect for Samsung to block the use of a defective dangerous device but not morally incorrect for us to use them in public? Double standards me thinks?
Samsung are NOT going to take away your device. You can still own one as long as the recall where you live is not[/U] official, its the carriers who will block the phone etc. Samsung will not honour further warranties nor offer updates.
Can you explain why you would not want to cooperate with Samsung over the recall?
Ryland
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No double standards at all. If I want to use the device in a fire proof bunker, then that would be totally up to me as long as this is a voluntary recall. Disabling the device makes it impossible to use it, and renders it to nothing but a paperweight. The double standard is there when Samsung disables the device while you own it and calls it "voluntary".
Nobody is saying anything about not cooperating. As a matter of fact, my own and the wifes are both going back sometime early this coming week. But this isn't about that, this is about Samsung possibly disabling a device, rendering it useless while people may have paid over 800 bucks for it.
svache said:
But this isn't about that, this is about Samsung possibly disabling a device, rendering it useless while people may have paid over 800 bucks for it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just covered that aspect in the post right above yours.
br0adband said:
It's not a voluntary recall in the United States since Thursday at 3PM Eastern time (October 13 2016), it's mandatory:
https://www.cpsc.gov/Recalls/2017/s...-Additional-Incidents-with-Replacement-Phones
If Samsung were to issue a "magic bullet" over the air that does brick/disable the Note 7 models that people are refusing to return as part of the worldwide recall process all that does is force the customers to do it anyway: they're not going to be happy with a dead/bricked device but they still have the option - even after all that BS they've gone through - to return it to Samsung and get a refund on their costs.
Again, I don't see a negative here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where do you read that it is mandatory?
Please, read the small prints at the CPSC site, there's a whole article on the matter. But in short, it is a manufacturer initiated recall, making it voluntary. It is not the CPSC that initiated it, which otherwise would make it mandatory.
PhoenixJedi said:
One good reason: I don't get my replacement phone until at least 10/28 because thats the day Pixel XL's ship.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay. I can see you are, like me, upset about the loss of your Note 7. I get it I truly do.
It is fine for you to take a pee in your own home swimming pool. You paid for it your water blah blah however, when you visit your local public swimming pool and despite the fact you pay an entrance fee is it okay for you to pee in your public swimming pool even though you have paid for entrance?
I hope your answer to that is no? Its no longer a question of morality when an action we make jeopardises the health and safety of the community we share and live in.
There is another post on this forum where a father and mother have returned their Note 7's as they have a young child in the house. Some call that stupidity I call that responsibility.
Providing you don't endanger others I don't have any objection to another person owning a Note 7. I fear that scenario in real life doesn't exist though?
Ryland
Ryland Johnson said:
Okay. I can see you are, like me, upset about the loss of your Note 7. I get it I truly do.
It is fine for you to take a pee in your own home swimming pool. You paid for it your water blah blah however, when you visit your local public swimming pool and despite the fact you pay an entrance fee is it okay for you to pee in your public swimming pool even though you have paid for entrance?
I hope your answer to that is no? Its no longer a question of morality when an action we make jeopardises the health and safety of the community we share and live in.
There is another post on this forum where a father and mother have returned their Note 7's as they have a young child in the house. Some call that stupidity I call that responsibility.
Providing you don't endanger others I don't have any objection to another person owning a Note 7. I fear that scenario in real life doesn't exist though?
Ryland
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To take your analogy for a moment, it wouldn't be up to the water company to stop delivering water if he wanted to pee in the water of a public pool, though. That's a bit the issue I'm having with Samsung if they do this. I totally agree with you on the other points, but I also feel Samsung shouldn't be doing that next step.
Ryland Johnson said:
Okay. I can see you are, like me, upset about the loss of your Note 7. I get it I truly do.
It is fine for you to take a pee in your own home swimming pool. You paid for it your water blah blah however, when you visit your local public swimming pool and despite the fact you pay an entrance fee is it okay for you to pee in your public swimming pool even though you have paid for entrance?
I hope your answer to that is no? Its no longer a question of morality when an action we make jeopardises the health and safety of the community we share and live in.
There is another post on this forum where a father and mother have returned their Note 7's as they have a young child in the house. Some call that stupidity I call that responsibility.
Providing you don't endanger others I don't have any objection to another person owning a Note 7. I fear that scenario in real life doesn't exist though?
Ryland
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here's the thing. The phones that verizon is offering as possible replacements (top of the line units) that you can switch the note 7 with include the iPhone 7, Pixel, Pixel XL, V20, S7, S7 Edge and a few others. Three of those phones are not out yet, therefore the Note 7 should not be allowed to be killed off until such a time as it HAS been replaced by the company with another phone. I get it, the phone can be dangerous, but people have lives and they've only given us ONE upgrade to replace it with. Why force people to waste it on a device they're not going to want when there are three brand new devices coming out that are eligable as replacement coming out?
svache said:
It's the point that it is a voluntary recall
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
About the possible "voluntary" term misunderstanding... maybe you and others missed this explicative post about this definition:
notefreak said:
Why do people think voluntary recall is any less serious?
"Most recalls of defective products are characterized as “voluntary,” a confusing term that can lead consumers to believe that the recall is optional. But voluntary recall is just government-speak for a deal that a manufacturer or retailer of a hazardous product has negotiated with the federal agency in charge of overseeing the safety of that product category. Voluntary recall would also seem to indicate that there are “mandatory recalls” that can be issued by the government should manufacturers or retailers refuse to cooperate, but nearly all the recalls announced last year were voluntary.
In light of this definition, consumers affected by this (or any other) recall should never assume voluntary implies:
less urgency for the need to comply with the recall, or that the recall is a preliminary measure taken by the company strictly out of an abundance of caution, i.e. that it would not otherwise be mandated by the regulating authority.
Do not be confused by the language: it is absolutely imperative that you take action and comply with the recall as soon as possible if you haven’t done so already."
This is from food safety site, but definition stands.
Aldo regarding liability:
"In some cases, a firm or company may initiate a recall voluntarily—meaning without a mandate from the CPSC. Such recalls are often the product of a negotiation between the product manufacturer/retailer with the federal agency that oversees their product category’s safety. Almost all announced recalls are voluntary. Voluntary product recalls are considered to be safeguards against potential lawsuits and sticky legal situations."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=69116188&postcount=21
To sum up:
voluntary means that the recall has been asked "voluntarily" by a manufacturer/seller (Samsung in this case)
mandatory means that an authority has imposed the recall on a manufacturer/seller
Therefore the "voluntary" has nothing to do with a possible customer's option to comply or not with the recall!
I hope these 2 terms are more clear now...
For Samsung, bottom line is that with all the commentary here and elsewhere of folks insisting they will keep the device regardless, they've little choice but to force an update to ensure the unit is disabled. Sure it will upset some owners and may lose them a few customers, but it is the right thing for them to do given the situation. What the folks shouting about keeping them they aren't seeming to care about the risk they will be placing other innocent parties under.
Sure I liked the 7 overall, only -ve for me was the edge glass, I've been in since the original note-1 came out. Mine is sat in its box waiting to be shipped back and I've switched to SIM only and reverted back to the note-3 until something better than current offerings are available. For me it makes no sense at all to hold onto the 7 even if they were not actively disabled by an update/IMEI block. No way am I prepared to take the risk of it failing while I am driving/travelling, am with my family/friends or at work, thereby putting other lives at risk.
Bit like driving drunk really, sure you may be ok and get home safely 98% of the time, but that one time when you don't, how many others got hurt and who's fault was it, the maker of the alcohol, the publican who served you, or you yourself for exercising poor judgement?
If you do continue to keep the device and go the custom ROM route to try to evade disable measures, you are fully and personally liable for whatever transpires thereafter. Can you really afford to compensate an airline for the loss of an aircraft? All the families for their loss? The cost of search and recovery operations?
Bear in mind too that just being there with a note-7 may lead to being implicated even if the device was not the initial cause, just because it's a known hazard and you hadn't returned it...
themissionimpossible said:
About the possible "voluntary" term misunderstanding... maybe you and others missed this explicative post about this definition:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=69116188&postcount=21
To sum up:
voluntary means that the recall has been asked "voluntarily" by a manufacturer/seller (Samsung in this case)
mandatory means that an authority has imposed the recall on a manufacturer/seller
Therefore the "voluntary" has nothing to do with a possible customer's option to comply or not with the recall!
I hope these 2 terms are more clear now...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, reading that I think there may indeed a bit of a misunderstanding on both sides.
The rest of what I said still stands, though. While I agree people would be best to comply with the situation, I feel it should not be up to Samsung to actually disable the devices if someone paid them in full, and that was my point really. If providers at the other hand stop serving them, stop allowing them on their network and whatnot, then that would be a different situation entirely, but the device shouldn't be bricked.
svache said:
No double standards at all. If I want to use the device in a fire proof bunker, then that would be totally up to me as long as this is a voluntary recall. Disabling the device makes it impossible to use it, and renders it to nothing but a paperweight. The double standard is there when Samsung disables the device while you own it and calls it "voluntary".
Nobody is saying anything about not cooperating. As a matter of fact, my own and the wifes are both going back sometime early this coming week. But this isn't about that, this is about Samsung possibly disabling a device, rendering it useless while people may have paid over 800 bucks for it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I truly understand your point. I think, perhaps, our wires are getting crossed. Maybe we are getting hung up on the word 'voluntary' as apposed to obligatory?
Perhaps, I don't know, so far Samsung have requested owners help them resolve this nightmare by returning their mobiles for a swop or full refund. I took the refund and will wait till March when the new devices are out.
Now, lets place ourselves in the shoes of Samsung. They produced arguably the most technologically developed mobile phone to date and we loved them. (trying to avoid the word 'best' as its subjective). Most unfortunately for us also Samsung, the said device has a major safety issue. Proof of that is Samsung has recalled the mobile twice, lost multi billions of euros and its another unknow what the brand damage fall out will be.
Has Samsung the legal right to block an unsafe device they released for public sale? I don't know? I know here in Europe once a recall is made 'official' it IS illegal to own, store, trade or sell such an item. I didn't need for the recall to be made 'official' Once I saw Samsung taking this massive blow I realised this was for real and I had to return both my devices twice.
Can you imagine how you would feel if while driving down the motorway your Note 7 decided to go pop and you swerved and caused an accident. WE cant claim ignorance after the fact. This is world wide news. I am sick and tired of seeing people take the pi55 out of the Note 7 and Samsung and us. The sooner all owners cooperate and return the mobile the sooner the vultures will stop circling and both Samsung and we can move on in safety.
You have the freedom of speech to walk into a cinema and shout 'FIRE'. With freedom comes responsibility.
Ryland
Here's the one thing though. What if they find that it wasn't a random issue and that the overheating was actually caused by some stupid people using defective USB-C cables with the phone (as that is a likely possibility, a bad USB-C cable can damage the phone in a way that the battery protection board and/or the charging circuits could be damaged). That would then prove the phones were not defective but were made defective by an external uncertified device. Then, anyone who DID keep their Note 7 is completely screwed even if its found that a faulty device/cable was plugged into the unit.
And don't say its not a likely scenario. They are still investigating, they can't replicate the situation in the lab, and this is a commonly known issue with USB-C cables that Samsung wouldn't try in the lab. CPSC says 92 units out of 1.9 million sold in the US overheated. It is completely possible there are 92 idiots in the world who don't know what a USB-IF certification is.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2016/11/04/samsung-galaxy-note-7-cut-off-by-new-zealand-mobile-networks/ I even do not know how to comment it...
It isn't like one didn't know it was coming. Bound to happen sooner or later.
Sent from my BBA100-1 using Tapatalk
This should be illegal
Enviado desde mi SM-N930F mediante Tapatalk
Before it was just some rep saying it but now its official carriers are going to do this.
Time to backup efs and find a usable imei to change to
statikk1 said:
Time to backup efs and find a usable imei to change to
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's going to come to that. I am sure I can find a suitable old phone to clone.
was obvious something like this was coming, they can't afford to legally force people to return the phones but since the recall is in effect they can legally disable them due to safety concerns. it's the same as I was reading the other day certain UK insurance companies are looking to void the insurance if a Note is anywhere near the incident. they are already banned on pretty much every airline, is it really worth putting up with a year of having to avoid people who don't want the phone in any situation it could cause a problem? the local hospitals in my area in the UK actually have a full ban on the Note as well if you are in the hospital with one you will be escorted by security off the grounds of the hospital and not allowed to return until you have got rid off the phone off site.
so yeah if you want to use a service and they have safety concerns and want to ban something that is entirely up to them, if you want to hang onto something that is potentially dangerous and take a chance that is up to you, but end of the day if it's their house it's their rules.
Belimawr said:
was obvious something like this was coming, they can't afford to legally force people to return the phones but since the recall is in effect they can legally disable them due to safety concerns.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, but who is the "they" here?
What's in it for Verizon or Vodafone? Samsung can't block IMEI numbers. I'm genuinely puzzled why the industry is so hell bent on getting all of these phones out of circulation. The efforts they are going to are not commensurate with the levels of damage to people and property we have seen. Which incidentally, seem to be declining by the day.
The fact is that a single Note7 is about 100x less dangerous than a single Honda (or any other) motorbike. Does it not strike people as rather weird that all these agencies are trying so hard to get rid of Note7's? It does me.
I would have thought all that was needed was for Samsung to say they there's a problem and that you shouldn't use it and that if you do, it's at your own risk. But they are trying MUCH MUCH harder than this. It's almost like they know something terrible about the phone and are not telling us.
Chippy_boy said:
It's almost like they know something terrible about the phone and are not telling us.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One of the phone has inside key for immortality hidden by one of samsung's engineer and now they try to find it by recalling all of them. Some people new it beforehand and tried to get to the key by smashing phone which then got fire as a result which gave solid base to recall all units by Samsung.
The rep from Verizon explained it to me. He also said Verizon employed some psychic to find the key by simply touching every note 7 before sent it to Samsung...
He said he hates one of the psychic to the guts because he touches iPhones as well and this is not professional.
Chippy_boy said:
Yes, but who is the "they" here?
What's in it for Verizon or Vodafone? Samsung can't block IMEI numbers. I'm genuinely puzzled why the industry is so hell bent on getting all of these phones out of circulation. The efforts they are going to are not commensurate with the levels of damage to people and property we have seen. Which incidentally, seem to be declining by the day.
The fact is that a single Note7 is about 100x less dangerous than a single Honda (or any other) motorbike. Does it not strike people as rather weird that all these agencies are trying so hard to get rid of Note7's? It does me.
I would have thought all that was needed was for Samsung to say they there's a problem and that you shouldn't use it and that if you do, it's at your own risk. But they are trying MUCH MUCH harder than this. It's almost like they know something terrible about the phone and are not telling us.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lets say your phone does fail and causes considerable property of physical damage what would you then do? in the majority of cases the person will try to sue Samsung, the carrier or other so these firms are taking every effort to get the point across if you are still holding onto the phone it is entirely on you, if they take every option to stop people using the phone they are 100% free and clear as they have done everything possible to stop the use of a potentially defective device.
now on the other hand looking at all the places and insurance firms trying to discourage use of the phone or banning it, if your phone goes up in say a locker and damages the belonging of several other people would you be willing to cover those damages? because with the amount of action taken to discourage the use of the phone you are at a point where the user is 100% liable and firms will ban it because they know the type of person hanging onto the phone will likely be the type who would try to sue someone rather than admit fault and that is why people are trying to stop the use of the device "in their house" because they know it is likely them who will lose out and have to take legal action to recoup damages.
Belimawr said:
lets say your phone does fail and causes considerable property of physical damage what would you then do? in the majority of cases the person will try to sue Samsung, the carrier or other so these firms are taking every effort to get the point across if you are still holding onto the phone it is entirely on you, if they take every option to stop people using the phone they are 100% free and clear as they have done everything possible to stop the use of a potentially defective device.
now on the other hand looking at all the places and insurance firms trying to discourage use of the phone or banning it, if your phone goes up in say a locker and damages the belonging of several other people would you be willing to cover those damages? because with the amount of action taken to discourage the use of the phone you are at a point where the user is 100% liable and firms will ban it because they know the type of person hanging onto the phone will likely be the type who would try to sue someone rather than admit fault and that is why people are trying to stop the use of the device "in their house" because they know it is likely them who will lose out and have to take legal action to recoup damages.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Gosh, I hadn't thought of that.
I promise you they will get sued and lose if they do that here in the US. It is not the carrier's job to protect citizens, especially if they have no proof the phone is definitely going to burn.
I believe it is against the law to posses a recalled product in Australia and several European countries. Not so in the United States.
pinetreehater said:
I promise you they will get sued and lose if they do that here in the US. It is not the carrier's job to protect citizens, especially if they have no proof the phone is definitely going to burn.
I believe it is against the law to posses a recalled product in Australia and several European countries. Not so in the United States.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Looks like Australia doesn't outlaw recalled products.
http://www.productsafety.gov.au/news/samsung-galaxy-note7
There is no wording to mention it's illegal rather that ACCC "strongly urges"
pinetreehater said:
I promise you they will get sued and lose if they do that here in the US. It is not the carrier's job to protect citizens, especially if they have no proof the phone is definitely going to burn.
I believe it is against the law to posses a recalled product in Australia and several European countries. Not so in the United States.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have no idea where in the world it is legal or illegal to possess a recalled product but I agree wholeheartedly that there will definitely be lawsuits in the US if these phones are blacklisted. Without a doubt....
Question. If I see a robbery, rape, fire or an accident or some other public safety concern, should I attempt to dial 911 to assist or should I shrug it off because I am a rogue accident waiting to happen? Should I shudder in fear so much as to avoid calling altogether?
Should I report myself to authorities?.....lol
I'd say no because I am neither illegal or criminal, get it?
whoofit said:
I have no idea where in the world it is legal or illegal to possess a recalled product but I agree wholeheartedly that there will definitely be lawsuits in the US if these phones are blacklisted. Without a doubt....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Having said that, here's me hoping that New Zealand users start suing which will serve to not give anybody else ideas :laugh:
http://www.droid-life.com/2016/11/0...imit-battery-60-continue-remind-users-recall/
Very soon Samsung will block all service.
Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk
As long as Samsung gets replacement phones/refunds to all they promised, I don't mind the IMEI block so much. Problem is that 19 days ago, they promised me a replacement S7E would come "within 21 days". I contacted them yesterday about how this was going since 21 days is almost up, and...They have run out of S7E stock (black Onyx) and don't know when new stock is coming...
This is Australia though, where they have just sent the 60% thing through and no official IMEI block discussed, yet..
Sent from my SM-N930F using Tapatalk
Verizon in the USA is also considering flagging accounts and suspending service for those of us who have a Note 7. I purchased it outright for $864 and was totally blown away with how nice the phone is. I don't want to return it.
The first batch was recalled due to a failure of the batteries circuitry to stop the charge. Statistic tell me that if an electrical component were to fail (aka infant mortality) then it would occur very early in the like cycle of a device. My device was always left overnight charging (until I learned about the 80% rule and battery life), and would never even get warm to the touch on either the usb-C or wireless charging. I was confident that my chances were slim to have an issue, but I returned it when they got the second batch of phones.
The failure of the second batch is being blamed on internal battery layers that are so close that they short out causing the catastrophic shorting of the battery. Again, no one knows how close is too close for these layers as Samsung never disclosed the details of the design much further. My phone gets charged every 30-36 hours since I got it and I have not had any issues. My second (current) Note 7 is even cooler when charging than the first one and as I never charge about 80%, my risk is even less. (what ever "less than less than 1%" is) I figure if my batteries plates were shorting out, I would have known it by now. So I feel my current phone is also safe.
Samsung or Verizon can not force me to return it. What they can do is exactly what they are: constant texts about the recall and now Verizon has stated (the store rep told me this when I went to inquirer about any changes to the return policy) that after November 25th, they will be suspending service. They told me originally the date was Nov 7th, but it got moved back. So take it with a grain of salt. I sometimes think that the reps don't have a clue. They will give owners no choice if they do this. But the question I ask is do we really own this? Verizon has already returned every penny I paid for the phone back to me. So in a sense I have the phone now for free, and that's not quite right either.
With the S8 four months away and a new Note 8 5-6 months after that (if rumors are true), Samsung in Korea is giving some great deals for those of us who stay loyal. (Korean customers if they stay with Samsung not only get the same $100 (equivalent currency) credit we are getting in the USA, but are also getting an opportunity to upgrade with no penalty to the S8 and Note 8. The new S8 and Note 8 will be sold for 1/2 the list price to these customer! I only hope the USA will get this same offer.
I agree that airlines and businesses have the right to ban the phone, and the liability now rest 99.9% with those of us who keep the phone. We have been warned in many ways. Its a slippery slope. Where does our right to keep it cross the line and endanger someone else? I looks at this like the smoking ban in the USA. Restaurants use to allow smoking in the dining rooms. They then morphed into having a "smoking" and "non-smoking" sections. I cant tell you how many times I would be in the non-smoking section that was right next to a smoking section and still had to breath their second hand smoke. I was glad when all restaurants when smoke free as did most businesses. I happen to be on the other side of the fence on this issue.
I only hope someone here extracts the firmware and kernel and can adapt it to say the S7 or another note device. I'm guessing the new 8 series will be very similar.
Belimawr said:
lets say your phone does fail and causes considerable property of physical damage what would you then do? in the majority of cases the person will try to sue Samsung, the carrier or other so these firms are taking every effort to get the point across if you are still holding onto the phone it is entirely on you, if they take every option to stop people using the phone they are 100% free and clear as they have done everything possible to stop the use of a potentially defective device.
now on the other hand looking at all the places and insurance firms trying to discourage use of the phone or banning it, if your phone goes up in say a locker and damages the belonging of several other people would you be willing to cover those damages? because with the amount of action taken to discourage the use of the phone you are at a point where the user is 100% liable and firms will ban it because they know the type of person hanging onto the phone will likely be the type who would try to sue someone rather than admit fault and that is why people are trying to stop the use of the device "in their house" because they know it is likely them who will lose out and have to take legal action to recoup damages.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Save your breath... common senses does not apply here. At least to some. Saying anything other than keeping the Note7 will just cause you to be branded as part of the conspirator.
It makes no sense what so ever to keep the phone outside of ego issues. Either "look at me I am a rebel" or "I've got a phone you can't get."
- Alternatives with nearly the same specs are out (Pixel and V20 both outperform the Note 7)
- support is going to be dead, Samsung and 3rd party
- it's not going to receive updates
- it's a hazard, Samsung didn't just kill one of their golden eggs for fun.
- keeping your phone affects more than just you.
BTW FOLKS next update knocks us off the networks. They are killing the phone. On phone with escalations depts for sprint and samsung all night 4+ hours and they are basically saying to buy an s7 instead of the note 7 and then buy the new phone if/when it comes out.
:crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying:
And you are surprised by this? It has been reported this was coming.
Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
I'm wondering what you were trying to accomplish. Did you think you could talk them out of it? Bite the bullet. Should be some great deals this weekend in the S7E. I think tmobile is basically giving them away on contract.
Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
Did you actually just tried to convince them not to kill the phone over the phone?
mooncraterx said:
On phone with escalations depts for sprint and samsung all night 4+ hours and they are basically saying to buy an s7 instead of the note 7 and then buy the new phone if/when it comes out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Were you trying to get them to cut you a deal? Like committing to let you move to a S7 Edge and then guarantee that you can move for free to whatever Samsung phone you want in 2017? Multibillion dollar companies don't cut one-off side deals when they have millions of customers. They can barely sell and support what they do offer and that their systems are designed to process.
In the U.S. the deal is you get your money back for your Note7 and $100 off via a bill credit if you stay with Samsung; $25 off if you don't. That's the deal and it's not going to get sweeter because they aren't going to reward hold outs for being hold outs. That would only piss the people who "did the right thing" off even further after having to exchange phones once, maybe twice, and ending up with something they may not have wanted. Based on comments made by the Samsung VP heading the U.S. there may be something down the road in terms of an offer on the 2017 phones for those that endured the debacle that was the Note7. That has nothing to do with Sprint, isn't being committed to now, and may or may not happen depending on where the Samsung brand stands in the spring.
So the choice boils down to exchange your Note7 and take your lumps or hold on to it until it become a collectable. I know some are trying to keep their Note7 until the 2017 phones come out but that may be problematic if Samsung imposes a year-end deadline for Note7 exchanges. I would if I were them. They want the phone out of people's hands and hold outs aren't their friends their problems.
This phone was going to be my last phone purchase and its halfway paid off.. now i have to buy another phone instead and wait sometime in the future to get the phone i actually want and start all over to pay? Well yes your right the corps screw the people and this is just one example because they messed it up. The people always pay not the corporations.
BarryH_GEG said:
Were you trying to get them to cut you a deal? Like committing to let you move to a S7 Edge and then guarantee that you can move for free to whatever Samsung phone you want in 2017? Multibillion dollar companies don't cut one-off side deals when they have millions of customers. They can barely sell and support what they do offer and that their systems are designed to process.
In the U.S. the deal is you get your money back for your Note7 and $100 off via a bill credit if you stay with Samsung; $25 off if you don't. That's the deal and it's not going to get sweeter because they aren't going to reward hold outs for being hold outs. That would only piss the people who "did the right thing" off even further after having to exchange phones once, maybe twice, and ending up with something they may not have wanted. Based on comments made by the Samsung VP heading the U.S. there may be something down the road in terms of an offer on the 2017 phones for those that endured the debacle that was the Note7. That has nothing to do with Sprint, isn't being committed to now, and may or may not happen depending on where the Samsung brand stands in the spring.
So the choice boils down to exchange your Note7 and take your lumps or hold on to it until it become a collectable. I know some are trying to keep their Note7 until the 2017 phones come out but that may be problematic if Samsung imposes a year-end deadline for Note7 exchanges. I would if I were them. They want the phone out of people's hands and hold outs aren't their friends their problems.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
mooncraterx said:
This phone was going to be my last phone purchase and its halfway paid off.. now i have to buy another phone instead and wait sometime in the future to get the phone i actually want and start all over to pay? Well yes your right the corps screw the people and this is just one example because they messed it up. The people always pay not the corporations.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Think you're alone? People who bought third party or grey market are still trying to figure out how to either exchange or refund. What about people that bought accessories that are now useless and can't be refunded? What about people that used an upgrade (lease or contract) who left a phone they might have been happy with to end up with a phone they wouldn't have wasted an upgrade on?
There's a thousand tales in the cold city. Lamenting what happened isn't going to change it. I personally think Samsung U.S. will come out with some sort of program for former Note7 owners to get in to a 2017 phone more cheaply. But right now we're stuck with the hand we were dealt.
So what. The Note8 model number has leaked. Wait a few months for the N950 and stop crying
mooncraterx said:
BTW FOLKS next update knocks us off the networks. They are killing the phone. On phone with escalations depts for sprint and samsung all night 4+ hours and they are basically saying to buy an s7 instead of the note 7 and then buy the new phone if/when it comes out.
:crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying::crying:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can install a coustom rom and change the model number in the buildpro to that of s7 edge
BarryH_GEG said:
I know some are trying to keep their Note7 until the 2017 phones come out but that may be problematic if Samsung imposes a year-end deadline for Note7 exchanges. I would if I were them. They want the phone out of people's hands and hold outs aren't their friends their problems.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think so.
Fit for purpose? No.
Satisfactory Quality? No.
As described? No.
I don't know about the US specifically but here in the UK, goods must meet those minimum standards or the vendor MUST give you your money back, give you a repair, or give you compensation. And if they don't you can sue them in what would be a 2 minute hearing before the judge awards in your favour. I'd be EXTREMELY surprised if similar consumer protection legislation did not exist in the US.
So Samsung / Sprint / Verizon / whoever will have to take a Note7 back when someone chooses to return it. Unless Samsung change their minds and decide that it's (a) safe, (b) reliable and (c) they switch the battery charging back to 100%. If they don't confirm/do all those things, you can give it back for a refund pretty much whenever you like. They cannot say, "sorry it's too late, you've had your chance" unless they make good the phone.
Samsung lost any rights to get "arsey" over late returns, the moment they started ****ing with our phones.
Chippy_boy said:
IAnd if they don't you can sue them in what would be a 2 minute hearing before the judge awards in your favour.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Out of curiosity, what reason would you provide to the judge for not availing yourself of offered remedies and intentionally holding on to a device deemed hazardous for months longer than you should have or needed to?
By the end of the year some of the things previously discussed (Samsung Account blocking, Play Services blocking, and IMEI blocking) are likely to be in place which will push all but the diehard hold outs off the Note7 and on to something else. Once some combination of those things are in place only 1-2% of Note7's will be unaccounted for. At that point Samsung will most likely care less about what happens to those remaining phones or the people clinging to them. With all that said good luck suing a multibillion dollar corporation in the UK or U.S. And no consumer protection agency in the world is going to defend someone's right to use a hazardous device for months longer than they should have. Like the title of this thread says, "The Note 7 is DEAD." And so is Samsung's caring about those that continue to defy the recall.
BarryH_GEG said:
Out of curiosity, what reason would you provide to the judge for not availing yourself of offered remedies and intentionally holding on to a device deemed hazardous for months longer than you should have or needed to?
By the end of the year some of the things previously discussed (Samsung Account blocking, Play Services blocking, and IMEI blocking) are likely to be in place which will push all but the diehard hold outs off the Note7 and on to something else. Once some combination of those things are in place only 1-2% of Note7's will be unaccounted for. At that point Samsung will most likely care less about what happens to those remaining phones or the people clinging to them. With all that said good luck suing a multibillion dollar corporation in the UK or U.S. And no consumer protection agency in the world is going to defend someone's right to use a hazardous device for months longer than they should have. Like the title of this thread says, "The Note 7 is DEAD." And so is Samsung's caring about those that continue to defy the recall.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're clearly not conversant at all with UK law.
First, Samsung have few obligations to the consumer here in the UK, unless they sold you the phone. Their only obligations relate to the warranty. I could go on about their obligations under the warranty, but I can't be bothered and anyway I don't need to because of point two.
Second, in the UK, your contract is with your seller and it is the seller who is responsible for the goods meeting the requirements of the Consumer Contracts regulations as I stated above. These obligations last for 6 years and are unconditional.
So, to answer your question as to what reason I would give to a judge, I wouldn't need to give a reason. I could say I lent it to my pet Panda who wouldn't return it. Or that I was using it as a shaving mirror. Or I could say nothing at all.
It would never go to court in the UK, because the seller knows this and knows they would lose instantly.
Remember, this is a *voluntary* recall. It is entirely the consumers' choice whether they wish to return the phone or not. The phone if already "Not of satisfactory quality", since Samsung have told us so. Now that Samsung have messed with the phone and installed this 60% charging limit, they have made the phone "Not as described", since it is sold as having a battery of 3,500 mAH capacity and now it does not. If the carriers block the phone, then it is "Not fit for purpose". Basically the phone fails ALL of the consumer protection tests, and the consumer can return it whenever they want.
Let me ask you a question: Let's suppose it went to court and the consumer says, I was sold this $1,000 phone which is (a) dangerous, (b) doesn't charge to 100% and (c) can't make phone calls and I want my money back. And Verizon's (or whoever the seller is) response is "well you had your chance to replace it so tough". Do you *honestly* think a judge would say OK then Verizon you're off the hook? Really???
And another thing. Why are you so worked up about people keeping their phones, when it's got **** all to do with you? Just curious. I am not planning on keeping mine in perpetuity, but I will hang on to it so long as it works and as late as possible so I have to wait as little time as possible before switching to an S8. Why does this offend you SO much that you have to keep visiting this forum telling people the phone is DEAD? I find your behaviour bizarre to be honest.
Chippy_boy said:
And another thing. Why are you so worked up about people keeping their phones, when it's got **** all to do with you? Just curious.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I could care less what you do. You and others that want to keep your phones are on the wrong side of history. The phone's been recalled and deemed unsafe and Samsung's offered refunds and exchanges to get them out of people's hands. Every website known to man is questioning the sanity and rationale of those holding on to their Note7's in the stories published about the progress of the recall. That's the world view, not mine.
This is a quote from Samsung (emphasis mine). Does it sound like they care about the "feelings" of people refusing to participate in the refund and exchange program?
As of today, nearly 85 percent of all recalled Galaxy Note7 devices have been replaced through the U.S. Note7 Refund and Exchange Program, with the majority of the participants opting to receive another Samsung smartphone.
We remain focused on collecting the outstanding Galaxy Note7 phones in the market. To further drive participation, we will be releasing a software update in the coming days that will limit the phone’s ability to charge beyond 60 percent, as well as issue a reminder pop-up notification every time a consumer charges, reboots or turns on the screen of their Note7 device.
Here's the front page of this forum. Feel the desperation of those trying to pretend what's happening with the Note7 isn't happening or can be avoided? It's only going to get worse. If you take a step back you'll realize you're really not angry with me or anyone else here. You're angry at an inevitable situation you can't control.
BarryH_GEG said:
I could care less what you do. You and others that want to keep your phones are on the wrong side of history. The phone's been recalled and deemed unsafe and Samsung's offered refunds and exchanges to get them out of people's hands. Every website known to man is questioning the sanity and rationale of those holding on to their Note7's in the stories published about the progress of the recall. That's the world view, not mine.
This is a quote from Samsung (emphasis mine). Does it sound like they care about the "feelings" of people refusing to participate in the refund and exchange program?
As of today, nearly 85 percent of all recalled Galaxy Note7 devices have been replaced through the U.S. Note7 Refund and Exchange Program, with the majority of the participants opting to receive another Samsung smartphone.
We remain focused on collecting the outstanding Galaxy Note7 phones in the market. To further drive participation, we will be releasing a software update in the coming days that will limit the phone’s ability to charge beyond 60 percent, as well as issue a reminder pop-up notification every time a consumer charges, reboots or turns on the screen of their Note7 device.
Here's the front page of this forum. Feel the desperation of those trying to pretend what's happening with the Note7 isn't happening or can be avoided? It's only going to get worse. If you take a step back you'll realize you're really not angry with me or anyone else here. You're angry at an inevitable situation you can't control.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not angry with you, I just find your posts very sad. Like this one above. All that effort typing rubbish about something you don't care about. You must have a lot of time on your hands. For all your protestations about it being "the world's view, not mine", it very clearly bothers you or you wouldn't keep banging on and on about it.
And as I say, Samsung can remain as focused as they like. I'll hand MY phone over when I want to, and not before. And I'll receive a full refund when I do. I am really not concerned how Samsung "feel" about it. I am enjoying using my phone which is working *perfectly* and I shall continue to do so.
Samsung and all the phone companies are doing damage control in social media.... remember that lol.
The whole situation is unprecedented but bottom line the recall is bs in general. these are not dangerous devices the devices are being pulled because they are TOO GOOD. that is the reason. If every product that failed at .0001% were recalled the store shelves everywhere would be EMPTY! The note 8 will have battery nerf for sure on it!
Chippy_boy said:
I'm not angry with you, I just find your posts very sad. Like this one above. All that effort typing rubbish about something you don't care about. You must have a lot of time on your hands. For all your protestations about it being "the world's view, not mine", it very clearly bothers you or you wouldn't keep banging on and on about it.
And as I say, Samsung can remain as focused as they like. I'll hand MY phone over when I want to, and not before. And I'll receive a full refund when I do. I am really not concerned how Samsung "feel" about it. I am enjoying using my phone which is working *perfectly* and I shall continue to do so.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Everyone of you have valid points. Realistically sammy made the choice for a recall in order to avoid massive lawsuits across the globe. My brother works for a top law firm and we talked about this and he said owners could and can still file for a heavy lawsuit which can help owners with better options rather than the current given.
Would be nice if people all over the world who own the device to stand up together against the corporation. That would also include not spending on any of the products they sell. If that was done for at least a month the message would be clear as they would lose revnue as well as stock market gains. Sorry if i blabbed on too much.
Chippy_boy said:
I'm not angry with you, I just find your posts very sad. Like this one above. All that effort typing rubbish about something you don't care about. You must have a lot of time on your hands. For all your protestations about it being "the world's view, not mine", it very clearly bothers you or you wouldn't keep banging on and on about it.
And as I say, Samsung can remain as focused as they like. I'll hand MY phone over when I want to, and not before. And I'll receive a full refund when I do. I am really not concerned how Samsung "feel" about it. I am enjoying using my phone which is working *perfectly* and I shall continue to do so.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So you are going to get yet another thread closed?
Why don't you understand that no one cares what you do with your phone. No one.
What peeves me with you is the way you insist on your rights of ownership that no one is attacking yet you constantly try to stifle threads where others, who are equally free to speak, desire to debate?
What you write about UK law is only part true. No court in the UK would find for you knowing Samsung and its retailers have been doing all they can to get the phones recalled. Samsung made a bloomer. Samsung corrected it with an international recall.
If you went to court.....No I will stop at that. Please go to court and then let us know the outcome.
Ryland
Ryland Johnson said:
So you are going to get yet another thread closed?
Why don't you understand that no one cares what you do with your phone. No one.
What peeves me with you is the way you insist on your rights of ownership that no one is attacking yet you constantly try to stifle threads where others, who are equally free to speak, desire to debate?
What you write about UK law is only part true. No court in the UK would find for you knowing Samsung and its retailers have been doing all they can to get the phones recalled. Samsung made a bloomer. Samsung corrected it with an international recall.
If you went to court.....No I will stop at that. Please go to court and then let us know the outcome.
Ryland
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No-one cares??? That's a ****ing laugh. Have you missed the 500 posts saying anyone who chooses to keep their phone is an idiot / moron / psychopath etc.
I am not denying anyone any right of free speech Ryland. On the contrary, are you suggesting I don't have the right to question others about why they feel the need to slander anyone who wants to keep their phone for a while? How bloody ironic.
You might notice that I am not the only person who feels like they are being attacked constantly, btw. It's a recurring them on this forum and it's VERY tiresome.
And this "court" nonsense. Of course it would never go to court. I will take my phone back to CPW in December or January or whenever and they will give me a refund. End of. Sorry to disappoint you.
If my posts irritate you, PLEASE put me on your ignore list. You do not have to read them you know.
Chippy_boy said:
No-one cares??? That's a ****ing laugh. Have you missed the 500 posts saying anyone who chooses to keep their phone is an idiot / moron / psychopath etc.
I am not denying anyone any right of free speech Ryland. On the contrary, are you suggesting I don't have the right to question others about why they feel the need to slander anyone who wants to keep their phone for a while? How bloody ironic.
You might notice that I am not the only person who feels like they are being attacked constantly, btw. It's a recurring them on this forum and it's VERY tiresome.
And this "court" nonsense. Of course it would never go to court. I will take my phone back to CPW in December or January or whenever and they will give me a refund. End of. Sorry to disappoint you.
If my posts irritate you, PLEASE put me on your ignore list. You do not have to read them you know.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I notice that today you have been rude to a non English speaker about his spelling of the word "Analysis" Yet YOU, an English born speaker, write the word theme as "them"? Double standards.
In a major way my debate with you is not about the Note 7 but about your crusade for the right to keep ones freedom of ownership while stifling thread after thread, even to the point of thread closure, that no one has the freedom to debate things you disagree with here! That causes me concern with you. Freedoms apply both ways. Politeness also costs nothing.
Ryland :good:
CAA's response to my request for their directive on theN7;
Once Samsung had identified issues with its Galaxy Note 7 device, the UK Civil Aviation Authority issued advice for airline passengers intending to travel with the phone to ensure it remained switched off for the duration of the flight.
The advice also said that the phone should be carried in hand baggage and should not be charged during the flight. The Galaxy Note 7 has since been recalled by the manufacturer and customers offered refunds or replacement devices, so passengers should ideally not be using the phone in any situation including flying.
Whilst banning the carriage of this device by passengers may appear desirable, previous prohibitions of certain electronic devices have been found to lead some passengers to conceal items in their hold baggage, which could create an increased fire risk. This would be more difficult to manage than if an incident occurred within the cabin, which could then be managed by specially trained cabin crew.
The UK CAA therefore does not consider that a ban on the carriage of Samsung S7 Note by passengers would be necessary to enhance safety. However, individual airlines are able to implement a ban on the device, having considered the potential risks, should they consider this appropriate to their operations.
We will review our position in light of any further developments.
*thumbs UP
so basically they would rather you didn't take the phone but wont ban it as they know people would hide them in suit cases where a failure could cause even greater problems or damage so they have chose to take the lesser of two evils while also saying ideally no one would use it.
Basically they're not concerned like US media sources would have you believe in terms of "dangerous phone" re: risk assessment
I wish Qantas was like that, about to fly this Sunday, and frigging Samsung still haven't got their act together to get me the black S7E swap they had promised over a month ago (got called early last week, no black in stock until Dec, ok, give me gold, still waiting!)
Sent from my SM-N930F using Tapatalk
So these "bombs" are so not dangerous, you can even carry them on a plane. Thought as much.
Chippy_boy said:
So these "bombs" are so not dangerous, you can even carry them on a plane. Thought as much.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
because as they said it is safer them going off in the accessible cabin where someone can deal with it, instead of in the suitcase in the hold where it could damage all sorts and potentially be near something that could start a fire, they have still said don't use them and specifically said it was because they know people would try to smuggle them anyway and they are much more dangerous in the hold.
so basically they are saying they are too dangerous to be used and too dangerous to ban knowing people would stick them in the hold where they could potentially bring down a plane due to lack of access.
Belimawr said:
because as they said it is safer them going off in the accessible cabin where someone can deal with it, instead of in the suitcase in the hold where it could damage all sorts and potentially be near something that could start a fire, they have still said don't use them and specifically said it was because they know people would try to smuggle them anyway and they are much more dangerous in the hold.
so basically they are saying they are too dangerous to be used and too dangerous to ban knowing people would stick them in the hold where they could potentially bring down a plane due to lack of access.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HAHAHAHHHAHHAHHAHHAHHHAHHAHHHAHHAHHHAHHA
HAHHAHHHAHHHAHHAHHAHHAHHAHA
Man you crack me up. "going off". HHAHHAHAHHHAHHAHHAHHAHHAHHAHA.
Funniest post on XDA ever.
I'll remember to light the fuse before I board. HAHAHAHHAHHAHAHHHAHHHA.
I got a notification on Saturday from Samsung with said that on Jan 31st they are issuing another update which will prevent battery charging completely and disable mobile network access.
This is GREAT news, because it means there can be ZERO question of whether I'd be able to get a refund or not when I take my Note7 back when the S8 comes out (or whatever else I decide to change it to.)
Thanks Samsung!
(Of course the update won't affect me, so I'll carry on using my Note7 until then.)
This had also crossed my mind, if one owns Note7 until S8 Note8 is released, will samsung be willing to replace Note7 (a flagship device) for the next best thing equivalent at the time S8 Note8 is launched?
Another question also crossed my mind, regardless if I have everything that came with the phone and I am lawful owner of the phone but have no proof of purchase, will smasung still be willing to replace it for me or thats just a pipe-dream?
To my understanding, samsung cannot refuse to replace Note7 to anything but the best thing available at the time, so when note8 S8 is out etc, they shouldnt be offering S7 as a replacement at the time, what do you think?
Also, another thought (bare with me here) , samsung had 96% of 3million devices sold returned, of which 220000 were taken under very intense testing and investigations to reproduce faults and what not, so look at this now, once all is now done and clear to public, they have over 2.5 million note7 in stock that require a new safe battery replacement issue, reboxing and should sell worldwide or in some limited regions for a discounted price as a safe refurbs (some time soon I guess), they wouldnt just burry all that gold worth pile of Note7's now , would they?
I almost sense a new "Note7S" coming out some time very soon, carrying "S" on the back as being SAFE with probably reworked same capacity safe battery or with some 3000mAh battery and free wireless charging backpack battery pack case that samsung was selling for note7 phones.
Your thoughts?
Chippy_boy said:
I got a notification on Saturday from Samsung with said that on Jan 31st they are issuing another update which will prevent battery charging completely and disable mobile network access.
This is GREAT news, because it means there can be ZERO question of whether I'd be able to get a refund or not when I take my Note7 back when the S8 comes out (or whatever else I decide to change it to.)
Thanks Samsung!
(Of course the update won't affect me, so I'll carry on using my Note7 until then.)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi how are you going to manage that this 31st January will not affect you? Please share as I still have note 7.
M.
xxxMJTxxx said:
Hi how are you going to manage that this 31st January will not affect you? Please share as I still have note 7.
M.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've got all the updates blocked mate. Have a search on this forum and you'll find plenty of ways to do that, depending on what updates your phone has had already.
Ok
It had 60 percent battery cap update forced to me overnight last year but I flashed that with older firmware so it went back to 100 percent, I also installed old 6.3 package disabler and blocked all programs mentioned on forum.
Is there anything else would you advice to do additionally?
M.
Thanks
xxxMJTxxx said:
Ok
It had 60 percent battery cap update forced to me overnight last year but I flashed that with older firmware so it went back to 100 percent, I also installed old 6.3 package disabler and blocked all programs mentioned on forum.
Is there anything else would you advice to do additionally?
M.
Thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm no expert mate, but I think you are good to go. You could try No Root Firewall as well I guess, but I haven't bothered. I have decided not to take ANY Samsung updates though - even for things like Smart Switch and Samsung Health etc - just in case the crafty barstards decide to hide something nasty in their apps.
They've been utter sheets about this whole thing. They have TOTALLY forgotten that they DO NOT own MY phone! It is MINE, not THEIRS!
Chippy_boy said:
I'm no expert mate, but I think you are good to go. You could try No Root Firewall as well I guess, but I haven't bothered. I have decided not to take ANY Samsung updates though - even for things like Smart Switch and Samsung Health etc - just in case the crafty barstards decide to hide something nasty in their apps.
They've been utter sheets about this whole thing. They have TOTALLY forgotten that they DO NOT own MY phone! It is MINE, not THEIRS!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ha Ha I thought so!
I have no root firewall but not sure how to set it up being honest
I had Samsung Billing pushed to me few days ago but for some reason I cannot find it under applications in my mobile so I hope Evil Sam is not hidden there waiting to reactivate.
So really we will see after 31st what is going to happen, I really would hate to go back to Note 3 I still have, however it was also good mobile for few years back ago.
How many people still are using/own N7 in UK you reckon?
M.
xxxMJTxxx said:
:
How many people still are using/own N7 in UK you reckon?
M.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Honestly, I have no clue, but I guess it must be quite a few. They wouldn't be going to the trouble of writing software updates for just a handful of phones would they!
I wonder why on earth they didn't actually stop to think WHY people are not returning their phones? For some clever people, they have behaved like they have the brains of goldfish.
Chippy_boy said:
Honestly, I have no clue, but I guess it must be quite a few. They wouldn't be going to the trouble of writing software updates for just a handful of phones would they!
I wonder why on earth they didn't actually stop to think WHY people are not returning their phones? For some clever people, they have behaved like they have the brains of goldfish.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the same update is world wide, altering it for different countries is a minor point as the majority of the changes comes in the form of the bands and network support, if they are removing all network support all they need is something that works on the exynos hardware, also the UK phones are the international phones so they are actually used across a load of countries so it is probably a large portion of the world covered by the same update as the UK.
also as I said there is little need for the networks to do their modifications since they all come in the form of network support that has been removed in this update.
No matter what it's going to be a nightmare. I wouldn't expect it to be as simple as walking into your carrier's store and swapping out for s8 - even though I do remember someone over at Samsung saying there was going to be a discount on "the next big thing". I'm in San Jose so Im going to HQ with mine, f em.
Chippy_boy said:
I wonder why on earth they didn't actually stop to think WHY people are not returning their phones?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They're probably paranoid about being sued on the off chance someone else's phone blows up. It would be bad press if it happens again, probably followed by ignorant people saying that Samsung should have tried harder to stop it, etc etc, because some people have probably missed the whole thing till now and haven't noticed anything. Plus, Samsung wants to be able to say 100% recalled and returned.
FYI I don't own this device, just trying to answer this question. Maybe all of you who have it should put "Proud owner of the Note 7. Take that Samsung" or something in your sigs lol. It would be kinda funny to see.
Sent from my Amazon Fire using XDA Labs
in my country, Mexico, there have not been, any sort of batt capping updates, or any threatening messages about anything! as no burning reports here, the consumer bureau has not issued any order or authorization on the matter, here would be unlawful to capp or restrict the use of a legally owned device, so, all very cool over here
Mr.Ultimate said:
samsung cannot
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Samsung can do anything they want. If you think whatever that is violates a law or your rights as a consumer its up to you and/or whatever governmental agency is involved to get them to do something different. That could take months. Many months. In the meantime you'll be stuck living with whatever decision they make - whether it's "legal" or not. Fighting multi-billion dollar conglomerates isn't for the feint of heart.
Sadly there are people who've tried to do the right thing that are stuck in Samsung's matrix and no law or governmental agency has rescued them. I can't imagine said agency's will feel a lot of sympathy for people who've held on to a phone declared potentially dangerous by its manufacturer for the length of time being discussed here. "I kept my potentially dangerous phone because I didn't like any of the alternatives" or "I was waiting for the Galaxy S8 to come out" seem like pretty self-serving reasons not to take advantage of all the remedies (including a full refund) Samsung provided. This isn't black and white and certainly not a typical "fit for purpose" issue.
BarryH_GEG said:
Samsung can do anything they want. If you think whatever that is violates a law or your rights as a consumer its up to you and/or whatever governmental agency is involved to get them to do something different. That could take months. Many months. In the meantime you'll be stuck living with whatever decision they make - whether it's "legal" or not. Fighting multi-billion dollar conglomerates isn't for the feint of heart.
Sadly there are people who've tried to do the right thing that are stuck in Samsung's matrix and no law or governmental agency has rescued them. I can't imagine said agency's will feel a lot of sympathy for people who've held on to a phone declared potentially dangerous by its manufacturer for the length of time being discussed here. "I kept my potentially dangerous phone because I didn't like any of the alternatives" or "I was waiting for the Galaxy S8 to come out" seem like pretty self-serving reasons not to take advantage of all the remedies (including a full refund) Samsung provided. This isn't black and white and certainly not a typical "fit for purpose" issue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All doesnt matter and all goes against the law, just risk of hazard makes them liable indefinitely until its back at their possession and no harm caused during the time.
Im no fain hearted and I dont own 7 figure bank account but I know its not a rocket science to bring giant companies such as apple or samsung to their knees, again, its not for faint hearted, I was talking from a legal stand point.
Darkness and high-cliff edge walking heights are usually appearing dangerous things for most, until they're certain and know there is nothing dangerous/hazardous in the dark and walking the cliff edge not without protections and precautions, metaphorically speaking.
Take a case where mobile phone gets on fire and one or many people suffers fatal consequences, days, months or even years from now, and investigators dig up samsung note7, who they gonna blame? Who has the case against who? Looking from even early state all cards are against samsung where there disaster happens or not samsung should be waist deep to do whatever necessary to sort their clients out. And yes they can try to attempt "write their own laws" warning consumers, threatening with return closing deadlines, refusing to take back dangerous devices back in, blocking devices, etc its their cards their game against everyone, not that they are more than the majority, I call it one against all and no matter how much money they are worth, it can take just few big cases and they will soon realize what wrong turn things can take, not that they would be willing to take such risks when and if case is brought to the round table.
Heck, even a 3 year ago my 10+ year Honda got a safety recall letter warning about potentially defective airbag systems and all was replaced at surprisingly my convenience cost free, even the car was bought second hand and I am probably 3rd or 4th owner of that vehicle, auto manufacturers know about how this game be played out i suppose, has been in this game before or seen it happen, consequences are clear to them if potential event take place, they would not only put someone deep in dirt, they would be there themselves as a consequence, so they took no risks, and I was pleasantly surprised at the same too how much forthcoming they were to sort this out, and note - this is 10+ year old product, not much different case to the one were talking about here, and I believe if they went this far with thing such as this, how much further they would have taken things if they would have found out that these vehicle models would have been a hazardous risk of fire and explosion while driving, parked at house garage etc? Go beat this statement
BarryH_GEG said:
Samsung can do anything they want. If you think whatever that is violates a law or your rights as a consumer its up to you and/or whatever governmental agency is involved to get them to do something different. That could take months. Many months. In the meantime you'll be stuck living with whatever decision they make - whether it's "legal" or not. Fighting multi-billion dollar conglomerates isn't for the feint of heart.
Sadly there are people who've tried to do the right thing that are stuck in Samsung's matrix and no law or governmental agency has rescued them. I can't imagine said agency's will feel a lot of sympathy for people who've held on to a phone declared potentially dangerous by its manufacturer for the length of time being discussed here. "I kept my potentially dangerous phone because I didn't like any of the alternatives" or "I was waiting for the Galaxy S8 to come out" seem like pretty self-serving reasons not to take advantage of all the remedies (including a full refund) Samsung provided. This isn't black and white and certainly not a typical "fit for purpose" issue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I reckon you work for Samsung. You must do, or you would have quit your tiresome campaign by now.
And as for "Samsung can do what they like", well let's see how successful they are on Tuesday shall we?
I'll post my update from my unrooted Note7 on Wednesday.
Chippy_boy said:
I reckon you work for Samsung. You must do, or you would have quit your tiresome campaign by now.
And as for "Samsung can do what they like", well let's see how successful they are on Tuesday shall we?
I'll post my update from my unrooted Note7 on Wednesday.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've unrooted Note7 also, dont want to touch any mods yet until its definitely necessary
Mr.Ultimate said:
Im no fain hearted and I dont own 7 figure bank account but I know its not a rocket science to bring giant companies such as apple or samsung to their knees
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Read this. The poor sod has been fighting Samsung since 2015 over his SGS4. At the end of the day you have to put a value on your time. The amount of time you'd have to spend even with legal assistance is probably worth more than what you spent on your Note7. The time some here have spent fighting the fighting noose is probably worth half the cost of their phone.
I'm all for principle but there's also the law of diminishing returns. Life's too short to intentionally seek out battles. At least for me. If I'm going to invest heap loads of my time that could be spent doing other more entertaining and productive things it wouldn't be over a mobile phone. It would be for something far more noble.
https://www.engadget.com/2017/01/20/samsung-cant-use-in-box-warranty-to-kill-galaxy-s4-lawsuit/
While I'd love to see Samsung getting screwed right back, I can't imagine there won't be a final return date of some sort and them actually exchanging the phone for the new models. They just sound too cheap for that
BarryH_GEG said:
Read this. The poor sod has been fighting Samsung since 2015 over his SGS4. At the end of the day you have to put a value on your time. The amount of time you'd have to spend even with legal assistance is probably worth more than what you spent on your Note7. The time some here have spent fighting the fighting noose is probably worth half the cost of their phone.
I'm all for principle but there's also the law of diminishing returns. Life's too short to intentionally seek out battles. At least for me. If I'm going to invest heap loads of my time that could be spent doing other more entertaining and productive things it wouldn't be over a mobile phone. It would be for something far more noble.
https://www.engadget.com/2017/01/20/samsung-cant-use-in-box-warranty-to-kill-galaxy-s4-lawsuit/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im not going to talk much, but that's not even serious case and analogy is just wrong. Compare this - buying matchbox to light the fire place at home but these matchboxes keep exploding and potentially setting itself on fire on random times (case #1) vs. match box that doesnt have 100% of the content or doesnt light up/doesnt burn every time you strike it (case #2).
Yes, its no brainer about law diminishing returns, if you dont have serious case and intelligent sought trough evidence, plan put together that will be serving to the finish line, and all , dreamland ego and being naive left behind - there is no chance to expect something good coming out of it.
We're talking about life threatening hazardous product here.
Have a great day.
BarryH_GEG said:
Read this. The poor sod has been fighting Samsung since 2015 over his SGS4. At the end of the day you have to put a value on your time. The amount of time you'd have to spend even with legal assistance is probably worth more than what you spent on your Note7. The time some here have spent fighting the fighting noose is probably worth half the cost of their phone.
I'm all for principle but there's also the law of diminishing returns. Life's too short to intentionally seek out battles. At least for me. If I'm going to invest heap loads of my time that could be spent doing other more entertaining and productive things it wouldn't be over a mobile phone. It would be for something far more noble.
https://www.engadget.com/2017/01/20/samsung-cant-use-in-box-warranty-to-kill-galaxy-s4-lawsuit/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Barry, my plan is to take my Note7 back to Samsung when I am ready (and not before) and ask for my money back, which I am very sure they will agree to, since they are obviously so very keen to get it back.
If in the monumentally unlikely event they say, "no, we'd like you to keep it please" (you're not REALLY suggesting that are you???!?) then I can file a small claim online in 20 minutes. It's a total no-brainer.
Sorry to disappoint you.