5 ms·

I think it's not "offloading their liability to the customer", if company says that the washing machine can take 4 kg and the customer then loads it with 7 kg.

I think it's not "offloading their liability to the customer", if company says that the washing machine can take 4 kg and the customer then loads it with 7 kg. It is perfectly reasonable to assume that if you do this, the machine will not be able to maintain its balance. (Seen that happen and customer complain, in no way specific to Samsung.)

icebraining 10y ago
No, I don't think it's reasonable that a modern washing machine will implode due to overloading. As others have pointed out, this is a solved problem, and I would expect Samsung to have built standard safeguards.
noja 10y ago
It's perfectly reasonable to expect the washing machine to not start if the load is too high.
- reacweb 10y ago
  It's perfectly reasonable to expect the washing machine to have bad performance if the load is too high, but explosion is beyond acceptable.
- SmellyGeekBoy 10y ago
  I'm not sure why you're being downvoted. All it takes is a simple weight sensor, couple your suggestion with an "overweight" LED to give the user some feedback and this becomes a non-issue.
  - gbog 10y ago
    Except if your weight sensor if the first thing that breaks when the machine gets old. I think all this is completely over the head. Say what maybe 3 machines exploded? That's far below the "noise" you have in every thing, it is statistically irrelevant. Also, side question: when I pay for a product like a baby stroller from a western company, which part of this money is spent on "law abiding", i.e. the verbose amount of warnings sticked everywhere and all the lawyers behind? I just bought one and this kind stroller tells me loudly I'm stupid from every side of it. I had a Japanese stroller before: cheaper, lighter, just better for kids and parents in every respect, and a just a brief non-liability warning. If I put 4 ten year old fat kid is will break, OBviously. That would be my fault.
hueving 10y ago
Would you say the same thing if a manufacturer produced a car that exploded if you put too much weight in the trunk? Or if it flooded the cabin with carbon monoxide if you missed an oil change deadline? Both are "covered in the manual".
- ptaipale 10y ago
  This "explosion" was not actually an explosion, just an imbalance and mechanical failure. But if I put way too much weight in the trunk of the car, and start driving, and the rear axle fails and there is an accident, yes, I'm still saying it's a user error. (It's by the way worth considering how much weight you do put in the trunk, or perhaps more importantly, how much you put in a trailer. I transported some concrete garden patio slabs and without calculating the actual weight, put a bit too many of them both in the trunk and in the trailer. It was definitely not fun to drive.)
  - csydas 10y ago
    I think the issue here is, as many other have pointed out, that the imbalanced/weight problem for washing machines has been a solved problem for nearly 50 years. It's fine that we're moving away from all mechanical detection methods and more energy/water efficient washers, but removing the previously solved operational safety functionality just seems silly. I completely agree it's an issue of operator error, but that's not the problem - the problem is that it was a _solved_ issue of operator error that is now a problem again because it seems like there were no safeguards put in place. It would seem to me that there has to be a grand number of chances to figure this out during the QA stage for these washers and determine a simple software solution, even if that solution is the washing session cancels, drains, and the LED errors with "Overloaded" or something. The owners may be annoyed, but at least the machine isn't ruined and it can train them to use the correct load size. Honestly, I don't think it's too unreasonable for any given person not to be able to estimate the mass of a load of laundry. I assume the recommendations (4kg, as you suggested) are educated guesses at best as it's hard to tell how much water any given item will retain during the spin cycle. Since it's an imprecise calculation anyways, wouldn't it make more sense to instead just let the machine dictate its own limits so the user can adjust their washing habits subsequently? edit: mistyped and forgot to write "...because it seems like there were no safeguards put in place."

icebraining 10y ago

No, I don't think it's reasonable that a modern washing machine will implode due to overloading. As others have pointed out, this is a solved problem, and I would expect Samsung to have built standard safeguards.

noja 10y ago

It's perfectly reasonable to expect the washing machine to not start if the load is too high.

reacweb 10y ago
It's perfectly reasonable to expect the washing machine to have bad performance if the load is too high, but explosion is beyond acceptable.
SmellyGeekBoy 10y ago
I'm not sure why you're being downvoted. All it takes is a simple weight sensor, couple your suggestion with an "overweight" LED to give the user some feedback and this becomes a non-issue.
- gbog 10y ago
  Except if your weight sensor if the first thing that breaks when the machine gets old. I think all this is completely over the head. Say what maybe 3 machines exploded? That's far below the "noise" you have in every thing, it is statistically irrelevant. Also, side question: when I pay for a product like a baby stroller from a western company, which part of this money is spent on "law abiding", i.e. the verbose amount of warnings sticked everywhere and all the lawyers behind? I just bought one and this kind stroller tells me loudly I'm stupid from every side of it. I had a Japanese stroller before: cheaper, lighter, just better for kids and parents in every respect, and a just a brief non-liability warning. If I put 4 ten year old fat kid is will break, OBviously. That would be my fault.

hueving 10y ago

Would you say the same thing if a manufacturer produced a car that exploded if you put too much weight in the trunk? Or if it flooded the cabin with carbon monoxide if you missed an oil change deadline? Both are "covered in the manual".

ptaipale 10y ago
This "explosion" was not actually an explosion, just an imbalance and mechanical failure. But if I put way too much weight in the trunk of the car, and start driving, and the rear axle fails and there is an accident, yes, I'm still saying it's a user error. (It's by the way worth considering how much weight you do put in the trunk, or perhaps more importantly, how much you put in a trailer. I transported some concrete garden patio slabs and without calculating the actual weight, put a bit too many of them both in the trunk and in the trailer. It was definitely not fun to drive.)
- csydas 10y ago
  I think the issue here is, as many other have pointed out, that the imbalanced/weight problem for washing machines has been a solved problem for nearly 50 years. It's fine that we're moving away from all mechanical detection methods and more energy/water efficient washers, but removing the previously solved operational safety functionality just seems silly. I completely agree it's an issue of operator error, but that's not the problem - the problem is that it was a _solved_ issue of operator error that is now a problem again because it seems like there were no safeguards put in place. It would seem to me that there has to be a grand number of chances to figure this out during the QA stage for these washers and determine a simple software solution, even if that solution is the washing session cancels, drains, and the LED errors with "Overloaded" or something. The owners may be annoyed, but at least the machine isn't ruined and it can train them to use the correct load size. Honestly, I don't think it's too unreasonable for any given person not to be able to estimate the mass of a load of laundry. I assume the recommendations (4kg, as you suggested) are educated guesses at best as it's hard to tell how much water any given item will retain during the spin cycle. Since it's an imprecise calculation anyways, wouldn't it make more sense to instead just let the machine dictate its own limits so the user can adjust their washing habits subsequently? edit: mistyped and forgot to write "...because it seems like there were no safeguards put in place."