Samsung Considering Remotely Disabling Note 7 Device's That Aren't Returned

[DroidModderX]

​

If it hasn't been made clear to you by now using a Note 7 is very risky. Reports of exploding devices keep flooding in. Cars have caught fire as well as houses. Individuals have been injured. You should in no way be considering keeping your device if it is affected by the recall. The only phones that are not affected are the Chinese variants. Samsung is taking this very seriously. They will be replacing about 2.5million devices costing the company a staggering $1Billion.

Yesterday a reddit post suggested that Samsung has plans to remotely disable Note 7 devices that have not been returned for replacement. The redditor spoke with a Samsung rep that explained Samsung will be sending out a care package including a replacement Note 7, the latest Gear VR and a prepaid envelope for returning the defective unit. The package is said to go out on September 19th. If you participate in the exchange program you would be eligible for a $25 gift card as well. This care package will be sent out to AT&T, Sprint, T-mobile, US Cellular, and Verizon customers only for now.

via SamMobile

 

[Jonny Kansas]

I know people are going to be mad about this, but I think this is reasonable, as long as they properly notify people before remotely disabling the devices and give them the chance to exchange it before they have no working device.

I know there are still small numbers of these things starting fires compared to how many were sold, but it's still a major liability. They could let non-returned devices go and have no more reports for 6 months or more, but the second one of those devices that should've been returned catches fire, there will be hell to pay.

 

[realged13]

I am cool with this. Send me a new device, the new Gear VR, I keep my Gear Fit 2 and get a $25 gift card? Sounds like a great deal to me.

 

[Jonny Kansas]

I am cool with this. Send me a new device, the new Gear VR, I keep my Gear Fit 2 and get a $25 gift card? Sounds like a great deal to me.

Heck yeah. I would be too. My buddy grabbed the Note on pre-order and I've been making sure he keeps updated on all of this stuff. He had the same reaction..."Free stuff sounds good to me."

 

[droidprincess]

So this has been confirmed by Samsung to be a rumor.

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.andr...eactivation-reports?client=ms-android-verizon

Sent from my SM-N930V using Tapatalk

 

[Efin]

Good to hear, thanks DP.

They send me a new Note 7, I'll gladly send their perfectly good, clean unit back. I'm not spending my time returning, then getting a temp set up, and then going to get another Note...


Sent from my SM-N930V using Tapatalk

 

[Jonny Kansas]

Good to hear, thanks DP.

They send me a new Note 7, I'll gladly send their perfectly good, clean unit back. I'm not spending my time returning, then getting a temp set up, and then going to get another Note...


Sent from my SM-N930V using Tapatalk

Oh yeah. If they wanna make this right, they need to make an even swap at the carriers, Best Buy, etc, or send the replacement to you first.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

 

[FoxKat]

I knew it had to be wrong. I said it here... Consumer Product Safety Commission: Stop using the Galaxy Note 7

I'm glad that Samsung put it to rest.

 

[Jonny Kansas]

Yeah, while I'm sure they have the backdoor to be able to do it, wouldn't be good for PR.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

 

[lloydstrans]

I know people are going to be mad about this, but I think this is reasonable, as long as they properly notify people before remotely disabling the devices and give them the chance to exchange it before they have no working device.

I know there are still small numbers of these things starting fires compared to how many were sold, but it's still a major liability. They could let non-returned devices go and have no more reports for 6 months or more, but the second one of those devices that should've been returned catches fire, there will be hell to pay.

If they don't get their hands on the affected units we will have a Firestone repeat. Where as Firestone replaced the affected tires and told dealers to destroy existing stock and used tires once removed. The method of which was to take a hole saw to the sidewall and install a 1 inch hole or so. A lot of those "destroyed" tires wound up in Mexico for sale. Of course some migrated back north where the trial lawyers had another field day.

I say return or brick it with warning. But some people will still utilize their device in some capacity, after all it's free. Toddler pacifier?

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[Jonny Kansas]

If they don't get their hands on the affected units we will have a Firestone repeat. Where as Firestone replaced the affected tires and told dealers to destroy existing stock and used tires once removed. The method of which was to take a hole saw to the sidewall and install a 1 inch hole or so. A lot of those "destroyed" tires wound up in Mexico for sale. Of course some migrated back north where the trial lawyers had another field day.

I say return or brick it with warning. But some people will still utilize their device in some capacity, after all it's free. Toddler pacifier?

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Issue comes with getting apps on it. Connect to wifi it moving data to install apps, they send the kill command. Would have to side load anything you wanted on there.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

 

[Mustang02]

What if someone is in the middle of an emergency and they kill it? I don't see this happening ever.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

 

[Jonny Kansas]

Maybe a "kill on reboot" & then "reboot when idle" situation or something?

Still, there'd have to be plenty of warning.

Didn't they kill the Nvidia tablets that had bad batteries? Bricked them with an ota or something? Not quite the same as cutting off someone's phone...

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

 

[FoxKat]

What if someone is in the middle of an emergency and they kill it? I don't see this happening ever.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Which is exactly one of my main points in the other thread post I linked. The other is, it's a personal possession, and the law is on the consumer's side. Sabotaging something I own, even if it's for "my own good" in some corporation's opinion would be criminal. Only the courts can make such a determination.

 

[Jonny Kansas]

Which is exactly one of my main points in the other thread post I linked. The other is, it's a personal possession, and the law is on the consumer's side. Sabotaging something I own, even if it's for "my own good" in some corporation's opinion would be criminal. Only the courts can make such a determination.

Even if they waited until you activated the replacement?

I suppose we're talking about folks that don't send in for the replacement.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk