2 ms·
The article suggests that the other option wasn't "delay the recall" but "kill the phone". The fact that "kill the phone" came after "send supposedly safe repla
by arjie 10y ago
The article suggests that the other option wasn't "delay the recall" but "kill the phone". The fact that "kill the phone" came after "send supposedly safe replacements" is what was fatal, not the early recall.
i.e. they thought they had enough evidence to damn one battery manufacturer, but the truth was the problem was elsewhere, and they still don't know. Faced with continuing problems and no known cause, if they'd pre-emptively pulled the phone, the hope is that they'd be seen as looking out for their customers.
- walter_bishop 10y ago'Dendrites and Pits: Untangling the Complex Behavior of Lithium Metal Anodes through Operando Video Microscopy' http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acscentsci.6b00260 http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acscentsci.6b00260
- arjie 10y agoAnything specific you'd like to highlight?
- walter_bishop 10y agoI'm not knowledgeable enough to say, but there are problems with these kind of batteries overheating, especially on recharging. Pumping electricity through a material produces heat. If it has nowhere to go then you end up with a fire and toxic fumes. The solution on airplanes being to put the battery in a sealed metal box with a pipe to vent any toxic fumes to the outside of the hull. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_787_Dreamliner_battery_problems https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_787_Dreamliner_battery_...