Last time this was on Slashdot they explained that the refurbished Note 7 units will have a slightly smaller battery. So yes, that is the plan.
Maybe they can try cranking down the charge current, too, and try to stop matching the iPhone's spectacular charging-time. (My iPhone 6 plus charges from dead to 100% in under 2 hours).
If the issue existed in the layered lithium battery and the tight tolerances of the case-battery fitment, they're probably planning a thinner (lower capacity) battery that is less likely to pinch and detonate. There's no reason it can't be just as safe as any other phone battery.
And thanks to the battery-sucking SoC in those units, it will then have abysmal battery-life.
Nearly Twice the battery capacity (in mAh) as the iPhone 7 plus, yet it actually has LESS battery life! 803 mins for the iPhone 7 plus, vs. 712 mins for the GN7. That's an HOUR AND A HALF difference!
That's just sad. Now just think how bad it will be if they decide to downgrade the battery capacity...
There are a couple of reports of a small number of iPhones (eight was the number I saw) that supposedly "exploded". Apple claims these units suffered mechanical damage that caused the battery to short-circuit. Smashing or compressing a Li-On battery is actually one of the main causes of fire/explosion; so Apple's explanation rings true. If it were a design or manufacturing defect, you would expect to see it in a larger number of units, not just a small handful.
Are you seriously saying that you can determine the cause of the warming just by looking at the temperature graphs alone? How is that supposed to work?
And how can you possibly have so much certainty as to be able to make the utterly fantastic leap that all the climate scientists in the world are lying just to make a buck. Don't tell me that you can also see psychological insights in temperature graphs too. I can't wait until you start solving crimes by barometric pressure readings.
Don't be willfully obtuse.
I never said all the climate scientists in the world are lying; just a large number of them.
Why does it take 37 years to show nature is responsible?
Something doesn't smell right.
What doesn't smell right is the DECADES now of so-called "Scientists" willing to prositute themselves and the truth all in favor of the next "Research Grant".
Not that I support ANYTHING (including the war on the EPA) that this so-called "Administration" does (see, I can do it, too!); but I am in wholehearted agreement (as is my meterologist friend) that "Climate Change" is NOT man-made.
All you have to do is look at the temperature graphs for the past century or so that we have been recording them to realize that, while we ARE in a "warming period", MAN has little-to-nothing to do with it.
Sorry. We just can't muster the energy to effect climactic changes on that scale, short of having a Nuclear War.
Perhaps, the only reason the information was leaked in the first place is because 'those' vulnerabilities have been fixed and there's no value to them anymore.
You don't seem to know very much about the topic. Right to repair means that the manufacturer can't lock me out of repairing the device. That's a pretty reasonable ask: I spent the money on the device, it's very much against my interests for there _not_ to be a market for repairs on the device. Might this result in Apple getting sued? Sure, if they lock me out of repairing my device. How is that a bad thing?
They can't lock you out in any practical sense. They can TRY; but they can't actually do it and still make the device repairable by THEM, too.
Besides, weren't these mfgs. Trying to use the DMCA to prevent people from repairing cars and farm equipment, or publishing repair manuals? The doctrine of First Sale applies. So, NO ONE can keep you from doing anything other than making something into a bomb, etc. And it is not illegal to publish a tear down or repair guide for anything that doesn't involve National Security.
You need to learn who the Archangel Michael really is. He could kick your butt in a fraction of a second. Not exactly a sheep, but more like the fiercest warrior you ever saw.
Um, MANY cell phone repairs can be done with nothing more than a replacement part, the right screwdrivers, and a spudger. Add in a soldering iron and you can do even more. Admittedly, they're not repairs of the rework-station-needed type, but once you hit that point it's probably cheaper to just replace the damned phone.
It doesn't take all that much brain power to watch an ifixit teardown and replace a cracked screen/digitizer, or replace a battery.
As for "This will result in a bunch of idiots suing Apple, Samsung, HTC, etc. for a DECADE to try and force them to publish Service Manuals and provide "Spare Parts" for the (still unrepairable for most people, no matter what the law says) smartphones and other asininely-complicated embedded products, and to no real eventual outcome other than making some lawyers rich(er)." that will be Apple/Samsung/HTC etc's fault for not publishing the fucking manuals in the first place and instead trying to create monopolies on repair as well as planned obsolesence..
First, I wasn't talking about the average "ifixit"-level repair. Of course there will be a continued and burgeoning class of shops and individuals that will be able to pull-off that sort of thing.
But it's the people that THINK they can go FURTHER with a heat-gun and spudger that will get all indignant and call things "unrepairable" and start filing lawsuits (haven't we already had a few of those?). THOSE are the people that will make it so the rest of us can never have anything nice...
Yo jackass, this affects repair shops. People who repair electronics. Moron.
Been there, done that, moron. So I actually do know a bit about this topic.
95% of the "Repair Shops" have no more SMT rework equipment nor expertise than my dog. This does NOT affect them from being able to replace a display module or battery on an iPhone; but most of them (fortunately!) will not even attempt to go much deeper than that in a smartphone. The risk of "collateral damage" is just too high.
But those aren't the people who will file lawsuits and drag this out in the Courts for years. No, that will be the stupid Slashdotters (and their ilk) who THINK they know how to reflow a BGA package because they once soldered an 8-pin SO-8 SMT Op Amp package successfully, and who get all full of (un)righteous indignation that someone would (wisely) tell them that what's on the mainboard of their smartphone is a whole 'nuther matter.
There is a difference. But the law won't be written that "smart", I can assure you.
This is not about smartphones and computers, although right-to-repair would benefit every owner of these devices. It's a battle going on in every farm state over being able to repair farm equipment.
The problem is, the bill won't be crafted finely-enough to place a distinction between classes of devices, such as cellphones, which just CAN'T be repaired by most people with commonly-available and relatively inexpensive tools (who wants to buy an SMT rework station to replace that BGA-packaged SoC?), and a John Deere tractor, which can.
This will result in a bunch of idiots suing Apple, Samsung, HTC, etc. for a DECADE to try and force them to publish Service Manuals and provide "Spare Parts" for the (still unrepairable for most people, no matter what the law says) smartphones and other asininely-complicated embedded products, and to no real eventual outcome other than making some lawyers rich(er).
Believe me when I say that I agree that, what John Deere and other farm equipment companies is as dickish as it gets; but there really IS a vast-difference between repairing a tractor with a 10 mm Socket Wrench, and repairing a smartphone with a bad Flash chip. Yes, fundamentally, they are both "repairs"; but that is about ALL they have in common.
I was thinking more in terms of practicality - give it 50 years and most proprietary systems are dead in the water. Long term thinking is essential for any kind of long term archiving otherwise you'll just end up transferring the data around every 5-10 years.
Welcome to the world of the Library of Congress. I read an article a few years back about how they have had to do exactly that. And I am SURE they have looked-into some ways of "future-proofing" their data stores...
It's not generally a good idea using trade secret and patent protected products for long term data archival. Eventually, the patents will expire, but in the short term, it restricts people from implementing and testing it and so you'll probably only discover the issues after it's too late.
Well, therein lies the rub.
Innovations will almost ALWAYS be Patented for whatever the max term (generally 20 years) allows.
So, do you deny yourself the POSSIBILITY that something truly IS "the answer" for nearly a quarter-century; or do you just jump in and hope for the best?
I don't take this problem seriously for most machines, because they can use software filters and high resolution displays to emulate the look pretty closely. But vector games will require crazy high-resolution displays to get the same effect, and those aren't cheap. I wonder if you could just bounce a laser (or simply a highly focused light) off a MEMS mirror or something. Or maybe you'd use multiples?
I've thought about building an upright arcade machine with a good-sized pivot LCD, I've got two 25.5" and I use one on my PC and the other one is sitting around. To me, using a LCD is a massive feature because I can build the machine shallower.
Exactly.
I'm not much of a gamer; but I did get REALLY addicted back in the day to the original arcade-version of Tempest. It employed a color CRT driven by a three-channel vector display system.
Even with the relatively-slow 8 bit processors of the day (being an Atari (IIRC) game, it likely used a 6502), the game was BLAZINGLY fast, mostly given to the fact that the display subsystem didn't have to worry about "undrawing" the last frame, or worrying about "XORing" stuff to put characters on top of the backgrounds, etc.
The difference is noticable in that, even today, the "PC"-versions of Tempest ALWAYS seem to be lacking the utter-abandon of the original. Part of that is the fact that most people don't have the "no-stops" optical-wheel control, so the ability to "spin and shoot" is somewhat limited; but surely part of the lack of excitement comes from the translation from vector to "raster", or "raster-like", display technology.
This is kind of a moot point on the "Google" end of things, considering they just announced they are GIVING UP on the Chromebook-business. And I don't think they have a viable Tablet now...
So, I assume that the Headline is a FUCKING JOKE, like the rest of TFS.
Let's see what those percentages will be like once the Chromebooks fall over, or the OS or Apps stop working because Google has abandoned them, too...
There was mini USB before that, which again, was fine and could have been expanded by Apple. No excuse for their lame connectors.
When they launched the first iPhone they didn't have to re-use the same crappy proprietary connector as the iPod.
Hey dumbshit, you are still ignoring that when Apple introduced the 30-pin dock connector, USB neither provide enough power to charge anything nor would it have allowed any peripherals. Heck, people with a brain still remember that many external USB hard drives at the time came with a (utterly not standard compliant) Y-cable that took the power from two USB ports just to power the drive.
Slashdot Mirror
Last time this was on Slashdot they explained that the refurbished Note 7 units will have a slightly smaller battery. So yes, that is the plan.
Maybe they can try cranking down the charge current, too, and try to stop matching the iPhone's spectacular charging-time. (My iPhone 6 plus charges from dead to 100% in under 2 hours).
If the issue existed in the layered lithium battery and the tight tolerances of the case-battery fitment, they're probably planning a thinner (lower capacity) battery that is less likely to pinch and detonate. There's no reason it can't be just as safe as any other phone battery.
And thanks to the battery-sucking SoC in those units, it will then have abysmal battery-life.
Nearly Twice the battery capacity (in mAh) as the iPhone 7 plus, yet it actually has LESS battery life! 803 mins for the iPhone 7 plus, vs. 712 mins for the GN7. That's an HOUR AND A HALF difference!
That's just sad. Now just think how bad it will be if they decide to downgrade the battery capacity...
Yes, the iPhones in China which have been exploding in large numbers have not seen any ban, and almost no media coverage.
No, you still can't take a Note 7 on an airplane. Even if it does not contain a battery.
Hey, dumbass!
This is about the iPhone 6 (and 6s) battery PREMATURE SHUTDOWN problem.
1. A lot different that exploding.
2. Largely fixed with a Software Update.
There are a couple of reports of a small number of iPhones (eight was the number I saw) that supposedly "exploded". Apple claims these units suffered mechanical damage that caused the battery to short-circuit. Smashing or compressing a Li-On battery is actually one of the main causes of fire/explosion; so Apple's explanation rings true. If it were a design or manufacturing defect, you would expect to see it in a larger number of units, not just a small handful.
Do they know its Apple they have by the balls?
Well, it's not like they are going to really delete it.
And it's not like Apple doesn't have backups.
Let's see if all this 2-factor authentication is everything it's cracked up to be!
If only more users actually used it...
Are you seriously saying that you can determine the cause of the warming just by looking at the temperature graphs alone? How is that supposed to work?
And how can you possibly have so much certainty as to be able to make the utterly fantastic leap that all the climate scientists in the world are lying just to make a buck. Don't tell me that you can also see psychological insights in temperature graphs too. I can't wait until you start solving crimes by barometric pressure readings.
Don't be willfully obtuse.
I never said all the climate scientists in the world are lying; just a large number of them.
Why does it take 37 years to show nature is responsible? Something doesn't smell right.
What doesn't smell right is the DECADES now of so-called "Scientists" willing to prositute themselves and the truth all in favor of the next "Research Grant".
Not that I support ANYTHING (including the war on the EPA) that this so-called "Administration" does (see, I can do it, too!); but I am in wholehearted agreement (as is my meterologist friend) that "Climate Change" is NOT man-made.
All you have to do is look at the temperature graphs for the past century or so that we have been recording them to realize that, while we ARE in a "warming period", MAN has little-to-nothing to do with it.
Sorry. We just can't muster the energy to effect climactic changes on that scale, short of having a Nuclear War.
As Steve Jobs correctly pointed out:
Netbooks really don't do anything well. In fact, they have no reason to exist.
Watch and Learn...
...and we all know what comes next.
Perhaps, the only reason the information was leaked in the first place is because 'those' vulnerabilities have been fixed and there's no value to them anymore.
So now WIKILEAKS is part of the Conspiracy?!?!?
You don't seem to know very much about the topic. Right to repair means that the manufacturer can't lock me out of repairing the device. That's a pretty reasonable ask: I spent the money on the device, it's very much against my interests for there _not_ to be a market for repairs on the device. Might this result in Apple getting sued? Sure, if they lock me out of repairing my device. How is that a bad thing?
They can't lock you out in any practical sense. They can TRY; but they can't actually do it and still make the device repairable by THEM, too.
Besides, weren't these mfgs. Trying to use the DMCA to prevent people from repairing cars and farm equipment, or publishing repair manuals? The doctrine of First Sale applies. So, NO ONE can keep you from doing anything other than making something into a bomb, etc. And it is not illegal to publish a tear down or repair guide for anything that doesn't involve National Security.
You need to learn who the Archangel Michael really is. He could kick your butt in a fraction of a second. Not exactly a sheep, but more like the fiercest warrior you ever saw.
That is, if he had ever actually existed...
Um, MANY cell phone repairs can be done with nothing more than a replacement part, the right screwdrivers, and a spudger. Add in a soldering iron and you can do even more. Admittedly, they're not repairs of the rework-station-needed type, but once you hit that point it's probably cheaper to just replace the damned phone. It doesn't take all that much brain power to watch an ifixit teardown and replace a cracked screen/digitizer, or replace a battery. As for "This will result in a bunch of idiots suing Apple, Samsung, HTC, etc. for a DECADE to try and force them to publish Service Manuals and provide "Spare Parts" for the (still unrepairable for most people, no matter what the law says) smartphones and other asininely-complicated embedded products, and to no real eventual outcome other than making some lawyers rich(er)." that will be Apple/Samsung/HTC etc's fault for not publishing the fucking manuals in the first place and instead trying to create monopolies on repair as well as planned obsolesence..
First, I wasn't talking about the average "ifixit"-level repair. Of course there will be a continued and burgeoning class of shops and individuals that will be able to pull-off that sort of thing.
But it's the people that THINK they can go FURTHER with a heat-gun and spudger that will get all indignant and call things "unrepairable" and start filing lawsuits (haven't we already had a few of those?). THOSE are the people that will make it so the rest of us can never have anything nice...
Anyone other than me believe that Apple, Samsung et al. (at a minimum) didn't look the other way before the Wikileaks dump?
Nope.
Just you.
Yo jackass, this affects repair shops. People who repair electronics. Moron.
Been there, done that, moron. So I actually do know a bit about this topic.
95% of the "Repair Shops" have no more SMT rework equipment nor expertise than my dog. This does NOT affect them from being able to replace a display module or battery on an iPhone; but most of them (fortunately!) will not even attempt to go much deeper than that in a smartphone. The risk of "collateral damage" is just too high.
But those aren't the people who will file lawsuits and drag this out in the Courts for years. No, that will be the stupid Slashdotters (and their ilk) who THINK they know how to reflow a BGA package because they once soldered an 8-pin SO-8 SMT Op Amp package successfully, and who get all full of (un)righteous indignation that someone would (wisely) tell them that what's on the mainboard of their smartphone is a whole 'nuther matter.
There is a difference. But the law won't be written that "smart", I can assure you.
This is not about smartphones and computers, although right-to-repair would benefit every owner of these devices. It's a battle going on in every farm state over being able to repair farm equipment.
The problem is, the bill won't be crafted finely-enough to place a distinction between classes of devices, such as cellphones, which just CAN'T be repaired by most people with commonly-available and relatively inexpensive tools (who wants to buy an SMT rework station to replace that BGA-packaged SoC?), and a John Deere tractor, which can.
This will result in a bunch of idiots suing Apple, Samsung, HTC, etc. for a DECADE to try and force them to publish Service Manuals and provide "Spare Parts" for the (still unrepairable for most people, no matter what the law says) smartphones and other asininely-complicated embedded products, and to no real eventual outcome other than making some lawyers rich(er).
Believe me when I say that I agree that, what John Deere and other farm equipment companies is as dickish as it gets; but there really IS a vast-difference between repairing a tractor with a 10 mm Socket Wrench, and repairing a smartphone with a bad Flash chip. Yes, fundamentally, they are both "repairs"; but that is about ALL they have in common.
I was thinking more in terms of practicality - give it 50 years and most proprietary systems are dead in the water. Long term thinking is essential for any kind of long term archiving otherwise you'll just end up transferring the data around every 5-10 years.
Welcome to the world of the Library of Congress. I read an article a few years back about how they have had to do exactly that. And I am SURE they have looked-into some ways of "future-proofing" their data stores...
The best bet is to go with already tested open standards that anyone can implement, test and evaluate.
Maybe that is the "best" bet; but you're treating it like it's the ONLY bet.
Quit being such an idealogue, you'll live longer.
It's not generally a good idea using trade secret and patent protected products for long term data archival. Eventually, the patents will expire, but in the short term, it restricts people from implementing and testing it and so you'll probably only discover the issues after it's too late.
Well, therein lies the rub.
Innovations will almost ALWAYS be Patented for whatever the max term (generally 20 years) allows.
So, do you deny yourself the POSSIBILITY that something truly IS "the answer" for nearly a quarter-century; or do you just jump in and hope for the best?
I prefer to chisel the 0s and 1s into a stone tablet. Very secure, no bit rot.
Reasonably akin to that, and a helluva lot more convenient, we have:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Now, finding a READER in a thousand years...
I don't take this problem seriously for most machines, because they can use software filters and high resolution displays to emulate the look pretty closely. But vector games will require crazy high-resolution displays to get the same effect, and those aren't cheap. I wonder if you could just bounce a laser (or simply a highly focused light) off a MEMS mirror or something. Or maybe you'd use multiples?
I've thought about building an upright arcade machine with a good-sized pivot LCD, I've got two 25.5" and I use one on my PC and the other one is sitting around. To me, using a LCD is a massive feature because I can build the machine shallower.
Exactly.
I'm not much of a gamer; but I did get REALLY addicted back in the day to the original arcade-version of Tempest. It employed a color CRT driven by a three-channel vector display system.
Even with the relatively-slow 8 bit processors of the day (being an Atari (IIRC) game, it likely used a 6502), the game was BLAZINGLY fast, mostly given to the fact that the display subsystem didn't have to worry about "undrawing" the last frame, or worrying about "XORing" stuff to put characters on top of the backgrounds, etc.
The difference is noticable in that, even today, the "PC"-versions of Tempest ALWAYS seem to be lacking the utter-abandon of the original. Part of that is the fact that most people don't have the "no-stops" optical-wheel control, so the ability to "spin and shoot" is somewhat limited; but surely part of the lack of excitement comes from the translation from vector to "raster", or "raster-like", display technology.
This is kind of a moot point on the "Google" end of things, considering they just announced they are GIVING UP on the Chromebook-business. And I don't think they have a viable Tablet now...
So, I assume that the Headline is a FUCKING JOKE, like the rest of TFS.
Let's see what those percentages will be like once the Chromebooks fall over, or the OS or Apps stop working because Google has abandoned them, too...
That's right, teach your grandma to make a new app where a simple damn web page would do. You're part of the problem, buddy.
FUCK OFF ***AND*** DIE, YOU INSUFFERABLE TWIT!
There was mini USB before that, which again, was fine and could have been expanded by Apple. No excuse for their lame connectors. When they launched the first iPhone they didn't have to re-use the same crappy proprietary connector as the iPod.
Hey dumbshit, you are still ignoring that when Apple introduced the 30-pin dock connector, USB neither provide enough power to charge anything nor would it have allowed any peripherals. Heck, people with a brain still remember that many external USB hard drives at the time came with a (utterly not standard compliant) Y-cable that took the power from two USB ports just to power the drive.
Yeah, I remember those things!
Listen to the AC. (Thanks, BTW!)
It's not hate. It's ridicule. And it's justified. Get over it.
Ridicule of WHAT, exactly?
The ENTIRE premise of the original post was fallacious.
Therefore, it was nothing but Hate.
Get over it.