4 ms·
Well it would have likely solved the Note 7 recall, and any futures battery recalls. It would also allow a user to remove an unsafe battery so that it's not in
by Slackwise 10y ago
Well it would have likely solved the Note 7 recall, and any futures battery recalls. It would also allow a user to remove an unsafe battery so that it's not in use while waiting for a replacement.
- johncolanduoni 10y agoDidn't the phones with replacement batteries also catch fire?
- simplexion 10y agoLess than .01% of the phones caught fire. The recall is crazy.
- nradov 10y agoIf the Note 7 hadn't been recalled then eventually many more would have probably caught fire. We'll never know what the cumulative failure rate would have been if the devices had been left in the field for years. Eventually people would have been killed.
- greglindahl 10y agoThe fraction of phones that caught on fire was similar to the fraction of hoverboards that caught on fire. Normal products with similar batteries have a much lower failure rate.
- MBCook 10y agoDo you have a source for that number?
- jschwartzi 10y agoWhen you decide whether a risk is unacceptable, there are two parts to consider: the likelihood of the event, and the potential worst-case scenario should the event come to pass. .01% is a very low likelihood, but the worst case scenario that one of these phones maims the user is an extremely bad outcome. In this framework the recall is the most sensible thing to do.
- wlesieutre 10y ago.10% within a few weeks of release. Without a recall, that number keeps on climbing and nobody has any idea where it stops. 1% of phones exploded? 10%? You obviously can't unexplode the ones that exploded already, but a recall is about the ones that haven't exploded yet.
- vitus 10y agoI thought the problem with the note 7 was with the power controller, and not the batteries -- didn't phones continue catching fire after the first recall?
- greglindahl 10y agoThere is still no root cause for the Note 7 issue, apparently.