Slashdot Mirror


T-Mobile Is Killing the Remaining Galaxy Note7 Units Today (gsmarena.com)

Samsung may only be in the planning stages for its Note7-disabling update in South Korea, but over in the U.S. things are in full swing. The company announced earlier this month that such an update would be sent out to all remaining Note7 units in the US starting on December 19. And now it's time for the first of the big four carriers to push the software to devices it's sold. From a report: That carrier is T-Mobile, which is starting the rollout today. The update will prevent the handset for charging, and will display a notification with information about Samsung's Galaxy Note7 recall and the steps needed to return the device. The build number for the update is N930TUVU2APL2.

109 comments

  1. Wrong! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I blocked TMobile's access to my phone. Now I'll have the only working Note7, and no one will dare get in my way. One flash of my phone and they'll start running. I'll take over the world!!

    1. Re:Wrong! by bobjr94 · · Score: 2

      Till they block the imei of all note 7's. They you have a wifi only mini tablet.

    2. Re: Wrong! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong! I programmed my Note7 to report as a Note6 on networks. So I can use it as a phone while I take over the world.

    3. Re: Wrong! by lxs · · Score: 1

      Do you smell something burning?

    4. Re: Wrong! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Wrong! I programmed my Note7 to report as a Note6 on networks...

      Well there's a dead giveaway since there was no such thing as a Note 6... Doah!

    5. Re: Wrong! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TMobile checks against a blacklist, not a whitelist. Note6 would be acceptable.

      -TMobile employee

    6. Re: Wrong! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you better hope that T-Mobile doesn't read /.

    7. Re: Wrong! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Very smart by the OP then. He picked a name that will never be on the blacklist because it's not a real phone, and will get ignored at first glance because it looks like a real phone name.

    8. Re: Wrong! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm a WOMAN you inconsiderate clod!

    9. Re: Wrong! by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 1

      I'm a WOMAN you inconsiderate clod!

      No. You're an Anonymous Coward.

    10. Re: Wrong! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why we get very few women on Slashdot, as soon as they appear they get insulted by losers like you.

      Ignore him OP, and we here at Slashdot apologize.

    11. Re:Wrong! by unixisc · · Score: 1

      You probably have one of the most expensive suicide bomber belts

    12. Re: Wrong! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Show us your tits!

    13. Re:Wrong! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I blocked TMobile's access to my phone. Now I'll have the only working Note7, and no one will dare get in my way. One flash of my phone and they'll start running. I'll take over the world!!

      You are not stupid. YOU ARE AN ADVANCED FORM OF STOOPID.

    14. Re: Wrong! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh fuck off, you don't apologize for me. Take your Social Justice and blow me...

    15. Re:Wrong! by thunderclap · · Score: 1

      There is nothing wrong with that. Use Dingtone and nothing changes.

    16. Re: Wrong! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      queue the white knights and their captains of the hos!

  2. Obligatory The Critic quote by Locke2005 · · Score: 2

    "... and nothing of value was lost."

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    1. Re:Obligatory The Critic quote by SeaFox · · Score: 4

      "... and nothing of Note was lost."

      There. :-)

    2. Re:Obligatory The Critic quote by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      Do I detect a flash mob of bitter Apple groupies?

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    3. Re:Obligatory The Critic quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, like TheFakeTimCook

    4. Re:Obligatory The Critic quote by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      No, I actually like my Samsung Galaxy S7. It's not perfect, but it's a better phone than the iPhone. It's waterproof and takes SDHC memory cards. My biggest complaint is they removed the infrared transmitter, so I can't use it to change the channel on the TVs in sports bars anymore. The other complaint is it's frickin' slippery, so a rubberized case for gripping it is pretty much a necessity. It also fits in my pocket, unlike an iPhone 6 or a Note.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    5. Re: Obligatory The Critic quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My problems with the galaxy line usually arise in the course of looking at just how much bloatware they managed to pack onto my unit. It's one thing if you're going to be rooting, etc. But even then... Security vulnerabilities in these OEM Handset Manufacturer maintained forks of Android are no joke, and Samsung's preference for alllllllllll the bells and whistles leaves them often exposed. (Not to mention the rarity of security patches.)

  3. This sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I really liked my Note 7...

    1. Re:This sucks by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Why, did it explode? Why are you using past tense - it's still w/ you, ain't it?

  4. Amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To me, this is an amazing and unprecedented act by a manufacturer.

    1. Re:Amazing by dejitaru · · Score: 4, Funny

      getting an update in just a few months on a non-nexus phone? Yeah that is amazing!

  5. Anyway to block it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone know a way to block this rollout? My phone is working fine, thank you.

    1. Re:Anyway to block it? by 110010001000 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yes. Just decline the update. I just did and my Note 7 is working just fi

    2. Re:Anyway to block it? by mccalli · · Score: 0

      On the off chance you're serious - you're an idiot. It's working fine now, in much the same way the Ford Pinto was fine when parked on a drive. You are endangering yourself - fine, you get that right. But you are endangering others too - not fine, you do not get that right. Turn the damned thing in.

    3. Re: Anyway to block it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I still drive my Pinto daily you insensitive clod!

    4. Re: Anyway to block it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heyyyyyy, the pinto was a fine car, only four out of about for million had the gas tank catch fire because they got rear ended incredibly hard. The recall fixed the issue with a sheild placed on the front side of the tank. Four out of four million sure is a lot better than most vehicles have today.

    5. Re:Anyway to block it? by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      My phone is working fine, thank you.

      Liar, liar. Pants on Fire.
      No, really! Stop, drop, and roll!
      t looks like you shouldn't have blocked that update.

    6. Re:Anyway to block it? by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      you're more likely to be burned or die by a burning building caused by cooking or smoking than any cell phone brand.

    7. Re:Anyway to block it? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Stop, drop, and roll!

      I can confirm that this doesn't always work. Sometimes it lights the pine needles on the ground on fire.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    8. Re:Anyway to block it? by unixisc · · Score: 1

      You can use the phone as a gas oven lighter by charging it near the cooker and keeping the gas on low

    9. Re:Anyway to block it? by unixisc · · Score: 1

      That update just stops you from charging to 100% and lowers it to 60%: it doesn't stop you from using it. There's no reason to block that update

    10. Re: Anyway to block it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're either working on your hyperbole skills or are an idiot. It's still a mystery why all the unprecedented hysteria around the Note7, but not all units will show the issue; in fact the expected rate of catastrophic failure a dolt like you keeps blabbing about is in the single digit percentage.

      IOW, most Note7 phones will be just fine, it's just that it's difficult to identify which won't.

    11. Re:Anyway to block it? by gravewax · · Score: 1

      this isn't an either/or risk. Only a Samsung galaxy simply adds to your risk of death, so in addition to possibly dieing from kitchen fires, smoking, car accidents, consuming banana's your chance of death is slightly increased by also using a Samsung galaxy note. That doesn't mean they are more deadly.

    12. Re:Anyway to block it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looks like it stopped working after the letters 'fi...'

      R.I.P. in peace

    13. Re:Anyway to block it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, that's the joke. Thank you for explaining it to us because the rest of us didn't get it. Your contributions are valued by all of slashdot.

    14. Re:Anyway to block it? by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      Driving your car for one day adds to your risk of death, much moreso than a samsung phone

    15. Re:Anyway to block it? by thunderclap · · Score: 1

      Its its last update anyway. And in about a year, the apps will stop being able to be accepted by google play. Plus all the samsung items will fail.

    16. Re: Anyway to block it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember speeding through alleyways at 60mph smashing trash cans and sometimes the unfortunate motorcycle. Seemed like a pretty safe car to me. If something got caught under and was sparking, just throw it in reverse, step on the gas, and let it go until something stopped you.

      Yes, very safe car.

    17. Re: Anyway to block it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No its not. Just wait.

    18. Re:Anyway to block it? by gravewax · · Score: 1

      Driving your car WHILE having your Samsung phone is even more dangerous. you don't seem to understand the risk is cumulative. Driving your car while eating bananas and smoking with your Samsung note is even more dangerous.

    19. Re: Anyway to block it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that the problem is that they didn't allow for battery swell, so the cell ruptures and shorts, causing a fire.

      Lithium Ion batteries need room to grow and contract, and Samsung didn't bother because they needed to be as thin / thinner than Apple. Marketing dictating design over safety.

      As that battery ages, it's going to grow more than it does now. Lets see how that works out for you.

      Sounds like Millenial thinking - completely blind to anything other than right now. Try thinking ahead 6 months and see how life improves.

    20. Re:Anyway to block it? by Merk42 · · Score: 1

      ${BadThing} only happens to other people, not me.

    21. Re:Anyway to block it? by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      Samsung phones are a negligible risk, tens of millions of them out there and only a few hundred with problems. Driving car on the other hand is very risky by comparison, essentially doesn't matter if you have Samsung phone in it or not. Crossing railroad track with your car makes possession of Samsung phone irrelevant.

    22. Re: Anyway to block it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a car accident != a manufacturer defect.

      If those self driving cars exploded because the battery got hot and expanded too Much while charging, then you'd have a good comparison.

    23. Re:Anyway to block it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it wasn't 10's of millions. It was a couple of million Samsung notes, at a few hundred catching fire that puts your chances of that happening at well under 100,000-1. while still it is low risk that is NOT insignificant. FYI, you have a higher chance of a note fire than being hit by a train at a crossing.

  6. How would one block this? by cfalcon · · Score: 1

    I'm curious about how you would block something like this, in the general case.

    I'm not suggesting anyone use a phone that might explode instead of handing it in for a refund. But in the broad case, what are the defenses that you have in a case similar to this, where you might have great reasons to prevent such an update?

    This sounds like it is being pushed out as a carrier update. On an iPhone, I can defer those as I can all updates. I suspect the same is true on an Android. Eventually, of course (or immediately in a case like this), such a phone will stop working as a phone on any network (or if that's not the case here, it could be made to be the case). But is that definitely the case?

    1. Re:How would one block this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      update is rather large. fill up your storage so the update won't fit...

    2. Re:How would one block this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd be interested to know if this is still possible as well. Will updates stop in airplane mode with wifi on? If wifi is on, is there a way to keep google/samsung from updating over the internet? (short of whitelist router)?

      Or are these things so hardcoded and automatic now they can push anything anytime they want and have full access to all your data or whatever is in range of the phone?

    3. Re:How would one block this? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I'm curious about how you would block something like this

      Set your phone on fire and burn your house down now before the update renders that highly desirable feature unusable?

    4. Re:How would one block this? by cfalcon · · Score: 1

      > something like this, in the general case
      > in the broad case
      > where you might have great reasons to prevent such an update

      l2read

    5. Re:How would one block this? by thunderclap · · Score: 1

      How do you block it? Root the phone and remove all the samsung software. Then pull the sim chip. The honest truth is T-mobile doesnt want any on its network. So remove it from the network. Then if it explodes you are liable.

    6. Re:How would one block this? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      l2read

      Irony.

    7. Re:How would one block this? by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      You would basically need to make the phone unusable to prevent someone else from making the phone unusable. Fill the storage so there's nowhere to download the update. Turn it off and leave it off. Etc.

      I have no idea if the carrier would invoke the next logical step, which would be to blacklist the IMEI of any known Note 7, causing the device to become a uselessly small wifi tablet. In that case, there's nothing you can do.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  7. In a galaxy far, far away... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    Opps, not that galaxy.

    1. Re:In a galaxy far, far away... by Merk42 · · Score: 1

      Why not? These Galaxys should be far, far away from us.

  8. I'm surprised that it's even legal by daninaustin · · Score: 1

    blocking the device from connecting to the carrier is one thing but intentionally bricking the phone is another (by preventing it from charging.) How long until the lawsuits?

    1. Re:I'm surprised that it's even legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are your damages? To sue, you have to show you've been damaged. You can return the phone and get your money back in full. No damages, no lawsuit.

    2. Re:I'm surprised that it's even legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With this brain bending logic I can damage steal any of your property as long as I give you the retail value. The charges should both be civil and criminal for destruction of a persons property.

      I guess you've already bought in to the 100% non-ownership society.

    3. Re:I'm surprised that it's even legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No but you obviously are brain dead. The product is in world wide recall. The goods are considered a danger to the public. You will be liable should a fire start from one...see you have been given every opportunity to return it. continuing to use one is GROSS NEGLIGENCE on your part.

      Enjoy being sued by anyone who happens to be harmed by your head in the sand use of this product. /really are people this stupid? //i mean i know the lower end of the curve must be...but surely they have all drowned by looking up in the rain by now.

    4. Re:I'm surprised that it's even legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is NO SUCH THING as a mandatory recall for phones. Sorry bud, but it doesn't exist. If it does, point me to the US law showing it, but you can't because it's not there. Samsung has issued a recall, but that's not the same as a government forced recall.

      Just like with cars, recalls can be ordered, but there is no force to compel you to participate in the recall, even safety recalls.

      Get a clue before you spout off.

    5. Re:I'm surprised that it's even legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must not understand how company recalls work. It's about limiting liability in case something happens after the recall has been ordered. There is no mandatory requirement you participate in a companies recall. This is about destroying someones property because they didn't comply with a corporate dictate.

    6. Re:I'm surprised that it's even legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess you've already bought in to the 100% non-ownership society.

      "100% corporate ownership" you mean.
      Non-ownership would be socialism (or marriage).

    7. Re: I'm surprised that it's even legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The product has undergone a mandatory full recall due to faulty exploding batteries. This isn't sabotaging a 'functional' device in the legal sense. These phones are already banned from many places as they're a safety hazard.

    8. Re: I'm surprised that it's even legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except burning and fire. These are not even allowed on planes! The lawsuit would fail. The judge would ask if you knew about the recall. Then about the fires and deaths. Then ask if you brought it in court. Then you can say but umm it's mine. And they can say yes it is. Keep it. It is disabled from charging. The battery fires up in excitement. Keep it. But no damages. The company has provided for you to return the phone at cost. Keep it. Its yours.

      Idiot. Show us your tits.

    9. Re:I'm surprised that it's even legal by arth1 · · Score: 1

      What are your damages? To sue, you have to show you've been damaged. You can return the phone and get your money back in full. No damages, no lawsuit.

      If you bought the phone subsidized with a contract, that's a bad deal - you are still stuck with the contract for services. If there's no other phone you want, you have to pay to break the contract, and end up with a net loss.

    10. Re:I'm surprised that it's even legal by arth1 · · Score: 1

      No but you obviously are brain dead. The product is in world wide recall. The goods are considered a danger to the public. You will be liable should a fire start from one...see you have been given every opportunity to return it. continuing to use one is GROSS NEGLIGENCE on your part.

      That's a tall assumption. The owner might be using it only in a controlled environment, or might have disconnected the battery and modded the phone to use a safe external one (wouldn't be the first time - I've seen external battery mods for phones where the owner needs to be able to change batteries, but the internal battery isn't replaceable).

      One thing is to issue a recall, but another is to disable the product. My previous car, I refused to take in for a recall which would weld the trunk window struts to prevent it from being opened (because of idiots who dropped it on their head). Should the car manufacturer have been allowed to disable my car remotely?

    11. Re: I'm surprised that it's even legal by arth1 · · Score: 1

      The product has undergone a mandatory full recall due to faulty exploding batteries. This isn't sabotaging a 'functional' device in the legal sense. These phones are already banned from many places as they're a safety hazard.

      It's not a mandatory recall. It's a voluntary recall.

      And yes, it is banned from some places, and can be used in others. You're allowed to own quite a few dangerous items you can't bring on a plane, and use them in your own home, at your own risk. Even recalled items. I have both lawn darts and buckyballs, and they're my property, on my property, and I'm responsible.

    12. Re:I'm surprised that it's even legal by thunderclap · · Score: 1

      Yes. However, he does have a point. He wants to keep the product he bought even if it can now be a small bomb. So how do we balance his rights with those who could be killed when it explodes?

    13. Re: I'm surprised that it's even legal by thunderclap · · Score: 1

      Thats assuming you let it update. If you are smart enough to keep the thing, I will assume you are smart enough to understand how to keep it functional.

    14. Re: I'm surprised that it's even legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We don't. As long as nothing happens, no victims exist.

    15. Re:I'm surprised that it's even legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. However, he does have a point. He wants to keep the product he bought even if it can now be a small bomb. So how do we balance his rights with those who could be killed when it explodes?

      Motherfucker can keep it, nobody is stopping him from keeping it.

      They're stopping him from using it.

    16. Re: I'm surprised that it's even legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      boy some people really do love being told what to fear these days..

    17. Re:I'm surprised that it's even legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But then, you must be a special kind of stupid to take a mobile network plan with a bundled phone. It's more expensive, you get less choice and, although it is rare now, some networks bundle bloatware with the phone.

    18. Re:I'm surprised that it's even legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that it is not Samsung that is bricking the phone, but T-Mobile USA. The fact that a third party is willing to refund the product T-Mobile USA is making inoperable does not change the fact that the action as such causes damages.

    19. Re: I'm surprised that it's even legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd love to see the laughing from the lawyers - "You want to sue because a manufacturer prevented you from using a device that is defective by design, and under a safety recall? Bwaaaaaaahahahhahahhahaha no I will not take this case."

    20. Re:I'm surprised that it's even legal by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      No, there is no forced recall.

      However, should this thing catch fire and burn your house down, good luck collecting on the home owner's insurance policy once the fire investigator finds that the ignition source was an incredibly loudly recalled phone that also should have received firmware forced through the networks to disable it.

      You'd have better luck collecting if your kid was playing with matches next to the curtains that somehow got soaked in gasoline.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    21. Re:I'm surprised that it's even legal by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      Where did T-Mobile get the firmware from? Spoiler alert: they didn't write it. They got it from Samsung.

      Also, it's not very surprising that a third party is willing to refund anything - it happens all the time in retail returns.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    22. Re:I'm surprised that it's even legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With this brain bending logic I can damage steal any of your property as long as I give you the retail value.

      Be my guest, I could use a new start in the new year. I probably only use half the stuff there anyway.

    23. Re:I'm surprised that it's even legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since the device is now deemed illegal due to its explosive nature, they CAN now legally block it.

    24. Re:I'm surprised that it's even legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The recall is the balance... he can get a replacement device from Samsung.

    25. Re: I'm surprised that it's even legal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Neither socialism nor communism even claim to do away with personal property. (ie: Property held by its user for exclusive use. Such as an artisnal craftsman's tools, or your 3D printer.) What they oppose is private property. (ie: Abstract posession of property which is capable of being used to generate wealth, in such a manner that the use of it by others generates wealth for the owner. Such as machines in a factory, owned by someone who does not work in the factory, or DRM.) State socialism, additionally, relies heavily on the idea of "public property" or property held in trust for common access by a commonly accessible body of coordination. (In theory, at least.)

      All of these concepts rely heavily on the notion of ownership. What these arrangements seek to avoid is the influence of capital, not ownership.

  9. Replicate the Note7 without the hazard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People obviously want the feature set of this phone. Why cripple future offerings, take advantage of the situation and put out a phone that people actually want.

    1. Re:Replicate the Note7 without the hazard by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      Shockingly, they don't have the next 7 years of products sitting in a warehouse somewhere just waiting for a green light to ship.

      Do you even know what you just asked for? Product development takes time, and short cuts are what leads to phones spontaneously combusting. Take a revenue hit now, build the god damn thing right, and release it when it's ready. People will still buy it, if it has the feature set they want, and doesn't feature design defects that cause your house to catch fire.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  10. Bricking is stupid, here's a better idea by davidwr · · Score: 1

    DO set the firmware to disallow charging beyond a known-safe level and/or slow down the charging rate to a slow, known-safe speed.

    DO throw up the "this device has been recalled" alert every time the user wakes the machine up.

    If you must, disable non-emergency calling and throttle the bluetooth and WiFi to painfully slow speeds to encourage people to stop using the device.

    But don't set it to brick when the power runs out.

    Why not?

    If Aunt Jane or Uncle Bill lost his phone the day before the recall was announced, when he finds it he'll need to be able to plug it in and get his photos off of it.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:Bricking is stupid, here's a better idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Uncle Jane lost his phone before the recall was announced, it would be out of power and thus wouldn't have the update on it, and would have to be charged before it could even receive the update. Problem solved.

    2. Re:Bricking is stupid, here's a better idea by rsmith-mac · · Score: 2

      DO set the firmware to disallow charging beyond a known-safe level and/or slow down the charging rate to a slow, known-safe speed.

      Note that there's no known safe charging rate or battery capacity. The Note 7 is a fire risk at all times.

    3. Re:Bricking is stupid, here's a better idea by jaklode · · Score: 1

      DO set the firmware to disallow charging beyond a known-safe level and/or slow down the charging rate to a slow, known-safe speed.

      DO throw up the "this device has been recalled" alert every time the user wakes the machine up.

      If you must, disable non-emergency calling and throttle the bluetooth and WiFi to painfully slow speeds to encourage people to stop using the device.

      But don't set it to brick when the power runs out.

      Why not?

      If Aunt Jane or Uncle Bill lost his phone the day before the recall was announced, when he finds it he'll need to be able to plug it in and get his photos off of it.

      I'd hope that it still works without charging the battery, so you can get data off if connected to the charger. But phones are always a bit special in that regard :(

    4. Re:Bricking is stupid, here's a better idea by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      DO set the firmware to disallow charging beyond a known-safe level and/or slow down the charging rate to a slow, known-safe speed.

      There was no such thing as was shown with the first and second update they rolled out.

      If you must, disable non-emergency calling and throttle the bluetooth and WiFi to painfully slow speeds to encourage people to stop using the device.

      Or just disable the IMEI. Phone calls are dime a dozend, and pretty much anyone is capable of calling emergencies in multiple ways at any given time.

      Why not?

      If Aunt Jane or Uncle Bill lost his phone the day before the recall was announced, when he finds it he'll need to be able to plug it in and get his photos off of it.

      If your special relatives did this they can still charge and power it up and download the photos off the device as it will have run out of battery and as such not received the update. Not that I suspect that people who lose a recalled hazardous device in their house that is still around so long after the recall have the mental capacity to figure out how to get the photos off it.

    5. Re:Bricking is stupid, here's a better idea by thunderclap · · Score: 1

      Thats because of the tiny metal fragments in the battery gel.

    6. Re:Bricking is stupid, here's a better idea by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      Because when someone loses an $800+ device, they just throw up their hands and say "oh well, I'll look for it in three months, I can't be bothered right now." Are Aunt Jane and Uncle Bill going on an expedition into the Congo? Searching for the true source of the Nile?

      Recall announced: early October.
      Today: late December.

      Your scenario is such an edge case that it's falling over the edge.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  11. Good ending by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

    It's going out in a blaze of glory.

    --
    Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
  12. It does not matter by OneHundredAndTen · · Score: 1

    Samsung is a company on fire. It will arise from its own ashes to deliver further explosive products that will no doubt re-kindle public interest. It is safe to say that people will soon have a burning desire to purchase those products.

  13. WTF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't this destroying peoples property?

    1. Re:WTF by Holi · · Score: 1

      Public safety comes first, and they have access to compensation. No legal leg to stand on with that argument.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    2. Re:WTF by will_die · · Score: 1

      Just because one side is giving compensation does not mean the other side has to accept that compensation.
      The closest lawsuit I can think of would be the sony one when they remove linux support from ps3. Sony lost and had to pay compensation.
      The problem with this is that you are getting a compensation that is probably better then you would get on a one-on-one lawsuit, and it does not cost you any money. Or in other words who is going to sue?
      As for safety that is being handled by not being allowed to bring them on aircraft. And as one other announcement on the plane said, if you just remembered you had one with you it had to be powered down, removed from any charging device and placed in a location you could watch it at all times.

    3. Re:WTF by thunderclap · · Score: 1

      Yes but giving them their money back resolves that problem.

    4. Re:WTF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      do you really need to be explained why it does not? are you really that dense? please let me know if you are. I really enjoy making fun of people and search for opportunities to do that.

  14. The update will prevent the handset for charging.. by jbn-o · · Score: 1

    The update will prevent the handset for charging [...]

    In other words, the proprietor always had this capability (and, no doubt, other things indicating true control over what this computer will do). So even if you think you'd like to retain the hardware and fix it, give or sell such services to others (including devices where this update may have already been applied), or even work with others to make fixes and publish the results so as to let others alter (what they believed was) their device, you are in for a surprise—your plan is being undermined by those who truly own the device (and that's not the set of people who paid for the tracker).

  15. Slippery Slope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Today it's to kill handsets that have a legitimate issue. Tomorrow it's for some made up issue. I find it very troubling that carriers or even the manufacturers of any device have the ability to remotely brick it. Especially a device like a phone which can be in some cases someone's only way of communicating with the outside world.

    1. Re:Slippery Slope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not as if this was a surprise, the recall has been in effect for weeks now. If the Note 7 is your only way to communicate with the outside world, you know about the recall (you had messages sent to your phone) and had enough time to take care of it. If you didn't, well, consider it a learning experience.

      Carriers always had that ability, every phone has an unique IMEI, it can be blacklisted which would leave you with a phone that would be unable to connect to the network. About as useful as a brick. So don't make this sound as something new.

      As for the made up issue, that would backfire badly, things like this tend to leak.

  16. The joke's on them by Patent+Lover · · Score: 2

    I just keep mine in airplane mode.

  17. Re:The update will prevent the handset for chargin by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

    your plan is being undermined by those who truly own the device

    Welcome to the world we were warned about.

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  18. The disable command has been observed... by ctrl-alt-canc · · Score: 1

    ...on our seismometer. It caused a strong event, but with an very undefined epicentre. I guess that many Galaxy 7 owner could no more read the notification message on the screen.