Slashdot Mirror
Samsung To Push Software Upgrade Which Will Cap Galaxy Note 7 Battery Charging at 60 Percent (zdnet.com)
As Samsung figures out how to tackle the big Note7 fiasco, it has found a temporary solution for existing users of the phone. It plans to roll out an over-the-air (OTA) update on September 20 which would limit the battery charging cap for the Note7 to 60 percent. ZDNET reports: The Over-the-Air (OTA) software upgrade will commence on September 20, 10 am in South Korea. Samsung is in talks with telcos from nine other countries where the phablet is available to deploy a similar software upgrade. Galaxy Note 7 has a battery capacity of 3,500 mAh, but the forced upgrade will enforce it to 2,100 mAh. The measure is meant to protect consumers who are still using the Note7 despite a recommendation to halt use. When the exchange starts on September 19 in South Korea, the tech giant will also offer to pay parts of the data fee.
This whole exploding Note 7 issue is waaaay overblown. I am using mine right now and have had ZERO pro
Although I suspect that Samsung will argue that this just that Galaxy 7s will only burn 60% as hot as they would normally.
Mimetics Inc. Twitter
I'd love the option to set my various devices' charge/discharge limits to 90% / 10% or 80% / 20%.
Yes, Li-Ion chemistry has improved a lot in the past decade but batteries still degrade faster at 100%.
How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
Your 60 percent of a phone has a headphone jack.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
How about turning off TouchWiz as well.
When asked why Samsung decided to embed the battery into the new phone so that the user couldn't simply change it themselves, a Samsung representative responded, "Courage."
They're offering customers 100% of their money back, the trouble is getting people to actually return the recalled phones.
How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
Can't you get 100% of your money back by returning it to the store? And Samsung also provides replacements.
"Samsung is in talks with telcos from nine other countries where the phablet is available to deploy a similar software upgrade."
This is a great example of just how broken Android really is. If it was Apple (and MS?), everyone would get this right away, but instead it has to be dealt with carrier by carrier, and if your carrier decides not to allow for the patch ("bandwidth!"), Samsung decides not to work with your carrier, or someone misses an email you won't be getting it at all.
Telcos should have zero say in when or how you update your device, or have any say in what you do with it in the first place.
All we need to do is load up a bunch of these phones into a fleet of un-recalled Toyota's... we will have out of control racing fire bombs!
Samsung steals 40% of customers' battery life
TFTFY
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
They actually have a site that where you can start the exchange process if you want a new phone. Also Samsung has said that in certain EU countries they will be deactivating (bricking) the phones that have not been exchanged by the end of Sept.
That's a cellular carrier problem, not an Android problem. They insist on having control over things they shouldn't be in control of. Apple had enough clout to tell them to f- off. Other phone manufacturers did not. Google had almost enough clout to keep their paws off the Nexus phones (though until the Nexus 6, Verizon refused to allow Nexus phones on their network for this reason).
IMHO at this point the solution is regulation to prohibit vertical integration. Phone manufacturers make the phone and only the phone. OS vendors only make the OS. App makers only make apps. Cellular networks only own tower networks. And cellular carriers only provide service (by leasing access to towers and activating phones on their network). That maximizes competition and interoperability.
Although I suspect that Samsung will argue that this just that Galaxy 7s will only burn 60% as hot as they would normally.
This is what is known as a Interim Containment Action (ICA). It's merely to prevent more fires before the phones are replaced. A recall has already ordered, and anyone that owns one of these phones can return them for a full refund.
One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
Isn't that the same fix Boeing used for the 787? I guess Samsung will also send every Note 7 buyer a metal fireproof container to keep the device in.
On the plus side, the battery will literally last forever. Charging to 90% doubles the life of a LiPo, charging to only 50% eliminates cycle-based aging almost completely (the cells will still degrade, but just as quick as they would if you didn't use them at all). 60% will likely last very long.
On the plus side, the battery will literally last forever. Charging to 90% doubles the life of a LiPo, charging to only 50% eliminates cycle-based aging almost completely (the cells will still degrade, but just as quick as they would if you didn't use them at all). 60% will likely last very long.
Normally that would be great, but I don't think extending the life of an explody phone is a positive.
I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
The problem is battery terminals manufactured too close together. Why does having 40% less stored energy make the problem any better?
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Samsung really ought to go into the munitions business.
They've already had to recall one of their washing machines which set fire to dozens of houses due to a bad design fault -- now the G7 problem.
Maybe they're not a bad company, they've just missed their calling :-)
Sounds like a phenomenal way to get users to never ever update their Android phone again. Yea, I know it's needed. No, that's not how regular users will see it.
They're offering customers 100% of their money back, the trouble is getting people to actually return the recalled phones.
How does that work if you "bought' the phone as part of a several year long contract? Will Samsung buy out your contract?
After the article about Sony boosting battery life ( https://hardware.slashdot.org/... ) I started looking for a way to stop my phone from charging past 80%. I was hoping to find an Xposed module that covered it, but no such luck. There don't seem to be any apps to do it, either.
Its interesting that Samsung cobbled together something to do it. I wonder if it is hardware specific, or can be exported to other devices.
Yeah, because there aren't any fandroids out there that constantly belittle people using iOS. None whatsoever.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
> don't put the new phone in the back pocket.
You'd prefer the explosion to be in your FRONT pocket?
Some day you'll get out of mom's basement and you'll finally have a use for what's in front.
Sorry but that would be contractually unfair. Not only are people entitled to a new phone but also the cost of obtaining that new phone (time and cost of going to store), the functionality lost between replacing a phone you can not use and also the labour lost in setting up and adding data to that phone. Samsung is fully liable for all those costs as well. Those costs can be really high and Samsung is contractually liable for them in many regions (they can not legally exempt themselves from those costs that they forced upon the purchasers of a dangerously defective product). I would suggest a class action law suit to recover those costs. I wonder how many are using those phones just so they can sue Samsung when the phones fails and that is the only reason for cutting battery life.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
They're offering customers 100% of their money back, the trouble is getting people to actually return the recalled phones.
Especially the guy with the burned-up car...
Pity android users? Isnt the current IOS update bricking iphones? Id rather have a grenade than a brick any day.
1. Better a brick than a bomb, eh?
2. The "bricking" affected a very small number of users, was only temporary, was recoverable by the user (making the term "bricking" somewhat hyperbolic), and lasted one whole HOUR before Apple fixed the problem.
Oh, and didn't set any iPhones or iPads on fire...
Kind of a different situation, wouldn't you say? But of course you wouldn't, Hater.
Most people aren't aware of their consumer rights, and companies take advantage of this fact on a regular basis. When i bought some hardware that was DOA a few months ago the company initially asked me to send it back at my own expense, only when i refused and asserted my rights did they organise a courier to collect (which would have cost much less because they will get preferential rates from couriers).
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
"Now with 40% less fire!!"
yes, you'll get your money back. I traded my wife's note7 for an s7 edge and it just changed the payment. I also got a $150 card at the store I bought it, which I got to keep, and a 256 GB SD card from Samsung, which I also kept. The s7 edge, also had a $150 gift card promotion, I got that as well.
So, this has worked out ok for me, but the note 7 was much better then the s7 edge, so that is a bit of a disappointment.
It also took about 3 hours to do the exchange, which is horrendous.
Cheap storage VM.
yes, you'll get your money back. I traded my wife's note7 for an s7 edge and it just changed the payment.
Then you're still under contract with the phone company. The question was whether Samsung would pay off your contract, so you can be back to where you were before.
On the face of it, this seems like a questionable move because people are just going to complain about Samsung "stealing" their battery life.
And personally, if people insist on using a device that has a much better than usual chance of killing them, I'd say no problem. We need to stop protecting people from their own stupidity.
But the amount of property damage that an exploding device can cause is pretty darn high, and there's an excellent chance that the property that is damaged doesn't belong to the device's owner. (ie: a store, a hotel room, anywhere someone may try to sneak in a charge so they can get an extra 5 minutes of Pokemon Go time) Should that happen, it won't be the device owner they go after, it will be Samsung.
Following the logic, I can see the entire device banned from use (IIRC the FAA has already done so), and even if they put out a fixed version, it will *still* need to be banned because no one would be able to tell if a given device has been replaced or not, so all of them would have to be considered suspect.
So I see this as a CYA move because people can't be trusted to not be idiots and do the right thing.
Technically speaking, wouldn't this be destruction of private property, a criminal offense?
A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
Whoooosh
No, I got it. I just decided to play along with the sophism.
So, it appears that the "Whoooosh" that you heard was from me.