Re-Boxing My Exploding Galaxy Note 7 In Samsung's Fireproof Box

[JimBoBarnes]

This has got to be one of the most interesting things I've read in a while! A fireproof box for return? LoLz!

Some tech sites do unboxing articles/videos, but today I find myself in the odd position of doing a reboxing article covering the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 's return packaging. One of the most interesting aspects of the recall is the thermonuclear-proof box that Samsung sent over to contain its exploding progeny. The box within the box is the most interesting. It's sturdy and has a ceramic fiber lining that is about a quarter-inch thick and covers the entire interior surface. The outside of the box has a number of ominous-looking caution signs that warn the contents are of the explosive variety.

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/samsung-galaxy-note-7-re-boxing,32834.html

 

[QueBert]

Imagine the outcry if iPhone 7's were exploding and needed fire proof boxes to return? No scratch that, imagine if 3 iPhones 7's exploded, people would be going apeshit. Galaxy Note's are apparently so dangerous AT&T & Verizon won't give out replacements because the new phone will maybe explode.

 

[JimBoBarnes]

Imagine the outcry if iPhone 7's were exploding and needed fire proof boxes to return? No scratch that, imagine if 3 iPhones 7's exploded, people would be going apeshit. Galaxy Note's are apparently so dangerous AT&T & Verizon won't give out replacements because the new phone will maybe explode.

Well, what is interesting...Apple's have been reported to start on fire. Yet they do nothing.

 

[Kazukian]

Well, what is interesting...Apple's have been reported to start on fire. Yet they do nothing.

I know, almost 100 7's have burst into flames in less than a month, right?

 

[StrangerGuy]

I know, almost 100 7's have burst into flames in less than a month, right?

Considering Apple sells like 10x more iPhones every quarter for years than Samsung's entire production run of Note 7s, I'll can tell you in good faith they are just as equally bad. *sarcasm*.

 

[Rubycon]

How many phones actually exploded? I'm willing to bet the number is close to zero.
These devices are overheating and their batteries venting. At worst there may be the release of smoke, sparks, and flames. But no conflagration has occurred.

People like to use the word explode/explosion. It sounds much more dramatic. Saying a phone exploded is like saying the space shuttle (Columbia) exploded.

 

[gorcorps]

How many phones actually exploded? I'm willing to bet the number is close to zero.
These devices are overheating and their batteries venting. At worst there may be the release of smoke, sparks, and flames. But no conflagration has occurred.

People like to use the word explode/explosion. It sounds much more dramatic. Saying a phone exploded is like saying the space shuttle (Columbia) exploded.

Exploded may be dramatic, but unless you've been living under a rock you should know the amount that has caught fire is above zero

 

[Rubycon]

Catching fire is not an explosion.
I'm well aware of the hazard. We've banned them on our ships. Even if the battery icon is green in the notification bar.

 

[JimBoBarnes]

Well, if we assume that every 100 reported phones IS an actual case (which it likely isn't) and did the math, out of 3.5 million phones the odds are pretty slim.

 

[StrangerGuy]

Well, if we assume that every 100 reported phones IS an actual case (which it likely isn't) and did the math, out of 3.5 million phones the odds are pretty slim.

So how many iPhones or any other phone out there also caught fire the same way the Note 7 did? A few out of many billions?

Your use of double standards is impressive.

 

[Crono]

Exploded may be dramatic, but unless you've been living under a rock you should know the amount that has caught fire is above zero

Close, it's a cruise ship.

"Burst into flames" is probably closer to representing what happens, but the media loves the word "explode". Though really they appreciate any sensationalist material they can get.

Not that the issue isn't serious, but people are going to remember this as being much more widespread and devastating than it actually was. Like when someone mentions the Pinto, all anyone remembers is that it was a fiery deathtrap, even if later reports indicated while it was definitely flawed in design, it wasn't so much more dangerous than other cars of the era that it deserves that legacy.

But this is what happens when you are the size of Samsung. You can't afford scandals (well, technically they can), they'll get magnified by the media if you can't suppress them quickly or effectively enough.

 

[JimBoBarnes]

So how many iPhones or any other phone out there also caught fire the same way the Note 7 did? A few out of many billions?

Your use of double standards is impressive.

The standard is simple - Apple has had reports of fireball phones for years, spanning multiple product generations. The American consumer protection agency has not investigated them, not once.
Samsung, a Korean company, has an issue with one line of phones and is immediately investigated. How's that for a double standard?

 

[Raduque]

The standard is simple - Apple has had reports of fireball phones for years, spanning multiple product generations. The American consumer protection agency has not investigated them, not once.
Samsung, a Korean company, has an issue with one line of phones and is immediately investigated. How's that for a double standard?

This is what I've been hinting at for a while. In fact, an iPhone 6 burst into flames on an aircraft a few days before a Note 7 did. Did anybody pay attention to it beyond a day or so? Nope.

 

[Kazukian]

Most cell phone fires can be attributed to physical damage. 100 + fires attributed to 1 new model is unacceptable in a consumer product.

Samsung was projecting the sales of 20 million plus Note 7's, 2.5 million were reported sold, extrapolate that with the number of fires, (10 times or so) and you're looking at 1,000 fires without any significant wear and tear on the phone. Add 2 years of the product being in the public' hands, and you could easily double the number of fires with physical damage to the Note 7's. We'd be hearing about deaths, plane crashes, car crashes, etc for years.

I don't think anyone would accept 1,000 fires, from a liability standpoint, it would destroy Samsung financially and as a consumer facing brand, it would destroy their reputation.

I'm not defending Apple here, I'm talking about previous Samsung phones, and all of the other manufacturers, with the help of things like cell phones (how ironic) videos and data are much more available than before. You just can't hide problems like this any more, and if a manufacturer does, the public hates a cover up more than the initial mess. A Note 7 burns in a Burger King in S. Korea and we know about it. Again, not defending Apple, but ALL manufacturers, they're doing a good job and producing safe, dependable devices.

Are there 1,000+ fires caused by any single phone models that have sold in volume?

 

[Eug]

Wow, the denial is strong in this thread. Samsung has been criticized, rightly so, first for making a defective product that actually did spontaneously combust. Then they were criticized, rightly so, for botching the recall process. And then their replacements spontaneously combusted too. And then FINALLY the halt production and people in this thread suggest they were unfairly treated. WTF are you guys smoking, combusting Note 7s?

And your biggest argument is that rare (and often previously damaged) competing phones also can light up, so that makes the occurrence of multiple undamaged Note 7s in a week lighting up par for the course?

And it's just bizarre that some here are complaining about the word "exploding" when all they're doing is disintegrating in a big ball of fire and smoke. Seriously? Do you really think that makes it somewhat more OK?

This is a big, big failure by Samsung, and on multiple fronts. Its criticism is well deserved. It will be interesting to see how they market its phablet lines going forward. This is a crisis for Samsung, and one they caused by themselves, so it will take some doing to fix this in the eyes of the consumer.

BTW, while Apple will definitely benefit from this, I am wondering if the biggest beneficiary might actually be Google. Perfect timing for Pixel. Cue the next wave of conspiracy theorists saying Google sent in industrial terrorists to sabotage Samsung's Note 7 battery production.

 

[Ichinisan]

Most cell phone fires can be attributed to physical damage. 100 + fires attributed to 1 new model is unacceptable in a consumer product.

This.

I saw a picture of a brand-new in-box iPhone 7 someone had received by mail and it had caught fire during shipment. You could clearly see the box and the phone had been badly crushed, which compromised the battery. It was not a manufacturing defect. However, nobody commenting or sharing it seemed to realize. I guess they thought it "exploded" or something.

ALL of these mobile phone batteries are volatile and can catch fire if you crush them.

A friend's old Galaxy phone (S3, I think) had a badly swollen battery. If I was certain that was the original battery, I'd say it was a manufacturing defect or a design flaw.

 

[spat55]

How many phones actually exploded? I'm willing to bet the number is close to zero.
These devices are overheating and their batteries venting. At worst there may be the release of smoke, sparks, and flames. But no conflagration has occurred.

People like to use the word explode/explosion. It sounds much more dramatic. Saying a phone exploded is like saying the space shuttle (Columbia) exploded.

I agree I'm wondering if some people will panic and sell them on Ebay for next to nothing, I'd love to get one myself.

 

[Mopetar]

This is what I've been hinting at for a while. In fact, an iPhone 6 burst into flames on an aircraft a few days before a Note 7 did. Did anybody pay attention to it beyond a day or so? Nope.

Because it's a single report for a device that's two years old as opposed to yet another incident involving a device that has not only just launched, but had recalls due to this exact reported problem.

If this is a problem, from what we know of how battery reliability and failure occurs the problem would be expected to accelerate rapidly. Outside of what are categorized as "infant mortalities" (a large number of initial failures in a new product) the failure rate follows a bell curve. If we're seeing 100 failures in this amount of time, we should expect to see even more during the next time period, followed by an even larger number in the next period. It might be possible that we're seeing a rather large number of infant mortality battery deaths, but if that hypothesis is wrong, it points to eventually seeing thousands or tens of thousands of phones having battery problems within the next several months of use.

Given that units which were marked as safe have started to experience problems and Samsung has halted production, it's safe to assume that it's not a case of a large number of early failures, but that the lifespan for these batteries is significantly reduced and that over a two or three year span a majority could be expected to fail. Given that replacement units have had batteries fail, it seems to point to a larger problem with the engineering of the phone instead of something limited to just the batteries themselves.

Anyone who's considering trying to get one of these to use is utterly foolish. Right now the failure rate might only be 1 in several hundred thousand, but that's expected to rapidly increase based on the distributions that battery failure typically follows.

 

[Ichinisan]

Because it's a single report for a device that's two years old as opposed to yet another incident involving a device that has not only just launched, but had recalls due to this exact reported problem.

Since it wasn't a just-released device, it's also much more likely to have been exposed to low-quality (even counterfeit) power supplies and accessories. It also could have been put through some poor treatment or extreme conditions.

 

[Mopetar]

Since it wasn't a just-released device, it's also much more likely to have been exposed to low-quality (even counterfeit) power supplies and accessories. It also could have been put through some poor treatment or extreme conditions.

Or it could have legitimately just failed. They've probably sold on the order of 100 million iPhone 6 units at this point. Even though the probability of failure after only two years is pretty low for the typical arbitrary device, when you have that many, you're bound to see a few.

Given the problems with iPhone 6 units being more bendable, it does make it more likely for that to be a contributing factor, but it doesn't really excuse it. If it's more likely to experience battery failures because it's more likely to bend, you're going to see more failures than you otherwise would if bending were less of a problem. Since the issue with the Note7 seems to be looking like something that's related to the device as a whole rather than just a single batch of batteries, it's not really fair to discount problems with iPhone 6 battery issues that are also due to the device as a whole.

 

[Ichinisan]

Bend-gate was definitely blown out of proportion. I've never personally seen a bent iPhone 6 or newer, but I've seen many older iPhones (4, 4s, 5, 5s) that were bent. Especially those owned by women that kept the devices in a back pocket. A friend put his brand new Galaxy S4 into the SIDE pocket of his cargo shorts at the T-Mobile store on launch day, drove home in his Grand Marquis, and found it severely bent when he got home. The screen wouldn't even come on.

My old iPod touch 5th gen got bent (still worked fine though). My current iPod touch 6th gen has been slightly bent since I bought it used, from a pawn shop.

I guess people that hadn't ever bent an iPhone before realized that a bigger phone can't be treated the same way. Many people still keep it in their back pockets and sit on it all day. The weak point on the iPhone 6 Plus was quickly identified. Even that weak point was still stronger than almost any point on many competing flagship phones, but they didn't get the kind of attention the iPhone 6 Plus did (nor the number of units produced/sold).

 

[Phynaz]

The standard is simple - Apple has had reports of fireball phones for years, spanning multiple product generations. The American consumer protection agency has not investigated them, not once.
Samsung, a Korean company, has an issue with one line of phones and is immediately investigated. How's that for a double standard?

Ah the "XXX has the same problem" defense. The last stand of the truly desperate attempting to divert attention away from the real issue.

 

[Phynaz]

It will be interesting to see how they market its phablet lines going forward.

I can say it won't be named "Note". That brand is a goner.

 

[Rubycon]

And it's just bizarre that some here are complaining about the word "exploding" when all they're doing is disintegrating in a big ball of fire and smoke. Seriously? Do you really think that makes it somewhat more OK?

BTW, while Apple will definitely benefit from this, I am wondering if the biggest beneficiary might actually be Google. Perfect timing for Pixel. Cue the next wave of conspiracy theorists saying Google sent in industrial terrorists to sabotage Samsung's Note 7 battery production.

My point is not to dilute the hazards of the situation on hand despite the odds being similar to one getting struck by lightning. The odds are generally in your favor however that doesn't mean it's fine to go outside during a raging thunderstorm holding a conductive rod in your hand. Oh wait, there are golfers and fisherman that do that.

Point was a device overheating, smoking and perhaps emitting fire is nowhere near as dramatic as a roll of detonating cord or even a rogue pack of bullet hit squibs detonating on scene.

Phone batteries are very small compared to ones used in RC products. And those are which are restricted most.

A 5S (five cells) at 5000mAH intentionally breached can be seen here:

If you want to see what a 1S 3600mAH pack can do (typical of most phones), a nail through it does the trick and the effect is far less.

And no, get your conspiracies right! It's ISIL infiltrating the manufacturers with hope that an errant device has a better chance of bringing down an airliner then perhaps a modified printer toner cart or bottle of soap!

Getting back to topic - The Note 7...

The real issue at hand is there has not been a formal explanation as to what is causing these events. Is it the battery pack itself or a combination of things? I had a Note 5 for nearly a year that spent most of its life charging wirelessly. It got super hot but never let out the smoke. Some of these phones aren't even hot and just provide little warning (crackling noise). It will be interesting to read what officially comes of this. Everyone should take note (terrible pun, I know!) as this could affect regulations on where you can use/store/charge your devices in the future.

I agree I'm wondering if some people will panic and sell them on Ebay for next to nothing, I'd love to get one myself.

That may not be a wise move. The device is abandonware and carriers may even block all affected IMEIs from using their networks. No updates, no development and only wifi for internet. And of course at any time it could get hotter than a Jon-e handwarmer!

 

[Eug]

My point is not to dilute the hazards of the situation on hand despite the odds being similar to one getting struck by lightning. The odds are generally in your favor however that doesn't mean it's fine to go outside during a raging thunderstorm holding a conductive rod in your hand. Oh wait, there are golfers and fisherman that do that.

Point was a device overheating, smoking and perhaps emitting fire is nowhere near as dramatic as a roll of detonating cord or even a rogue pack of bullet hit squibs detonating on scene.

So in other words you are downplaying the hazards of the situation.