https://www.instrumental.ai/blog/20 16/12/1/aggressive-desig

K.

>>57857613
This is pretty old news.

>>57857613
GREAT SUCCESS. I bet Samsung's engineering team is proud.

>>57858964
the cause wasn't widely known, unless you're saying you read a news report specifically identifying this (not conjecturing).

can you post a dated story?

>>57857613
>>MUH THIN
But they made the phone fatter to fit more battery.

>>57859160
yeah, this was more of an issue of companies trying to do the "tight design tolerance" thing apple does, but in this case fucking it up.

maybe apple hires more careful chinks or something, but in general you shouldn't trust chinese manufacturing to be within 1mm of tolerance.

lipo batteries are very fucking picky, and if treated poorly they can and will explode.

if you pierce one of the cells it will catch on fire imediately

>>57859190
You know exploding iPhone batteries are a thing too right?

http://bgr.com/2016/10/04/iphone-6s-battery-explosion-fire/

Aplel are just as shit as all the other manufacturers. Only differance is they charge a premium for their logo.

>>57859445
of course every device manufactured in mass quantities has a failure rate. the question is what that rate is. by all appearances (that is, looking at news reports, mostly) the failure rate for Galaxy Note 7s is dramatically higher than for iPhones. far fewer Note 7s were sold, but we heard about lots of cases of this happening. unless you think there's a huge conspiracy to cover up iPhone battery explosions (and that literally no news agency in the world hasn't been bought off — because being the one news agency breaking this story would be that much more tempting if you know nobody else will do it), it seems reasonable to conclude that iPhone batteries are exploding at a much, much lower rate (that is, per hundred thousand units).

either you know that your argument was specious, or you completely missed sight of this obvious point. the latter would be incredibly stupid of you, so i'm going to assume you thought of that and decided to frame the argument differently anyway, as this "you know X does exist" kind of thing. don't make these kinds of arguments. i bet i don't like iPhones any more than you do, but this specious shit makes us all look like idiots.

>>57859798
>trusting the news with reporting factual info
Dam anon, you've been brainwashed from the inside-out.

>>57859917
the fact that you can post on 4chan as easily as you do doesn't give you some confidence that someone even slightly retarded could easily make a site documenting and reporting on the aggregate data of exploding iPhones?

the logistics that go into a cover-up make anything involving "the public" basically impossible. you'd have to capture every online news agency — even the retards with just twitter accounts — you'd need to pay off every iPhone owner to ensure they don't tell anyone. and nobody anywhere could fuck up and discuss it over drinks or anything like that anywhere, ever, or the whole thing would be blown.

i'm sure there are conspiracies at higher levels, like in national-level governments and executive levels of corporations, but how far down do you think you go before you're looking at people who are just too inept to pull off setting the time on their VCR, let alone actively participate in a conspiracy?

where is the heat sink

>>57860119
it's a mobile phone. the CPU is throttled and low-power, so it doesn't generate that much heat in the first place. there's no need for anything more than a design that generally allows for heat to dissipate normally.

>>57859445
It's so rare that it isn't a problem.
Samsung's case was so bad, they discontinued the phone and issued refunds.
The iPhone went on to sell millions, now the 3rd highest selling phone of all time

File: Screenshot_20161202-011854(1).jpg (113KB, 720x1072px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 720x1072px

>>57860164
pic related doesn't agree with you

>>57860164
somehow people see roughly equivalent raw numbers (if that) of battery explosions and think that it means the iPhone has the same problem. people obviously have no notion of comparing statistics of proportions, but i guess i wouldn't expect zealots on 4chan to have basic stats under their belts.

>>57860197
not him, but you're showing the operating system market share, which isn't a comment on the main point he made, that it's "so rare that it isn't a problem". so you might be arguing that his totally unrelated comment about the iPhone being the 3rd highest selling phone of all time, but that would be immaterial to either
- it's so rare, etc...
- Samsung's case was so bad, etc... or
- the iPhone went on to sell millions

also, are you saying that you think android is all one phone?

>>57860199
We don't even have stats you retard. Even if we did we don't know how many cover-ups apple is engaging in. Money = power you know.

>>57860197
That's marketshare - which includes pajeets, mexicans, niggers, and subhuman poorfag trash using $10 Android phones
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_mobile_phones

Give me back my cell, Tyrel

>>57860223
>Even if we did we don't know how many cover-ups apple is engaging in.
i talked about this earlier up. like 3 or 4 posts back. not that hard to see on my monitor. basically it's true that apple has a shit ton of money and could try buying everyone off, but the more news agencies that take kickbacks, the juicier it would be for one agency to reject it and run with the story of all these companies taking kickbacks. if Wired, Engadget, The Verge, and Ars all took bribes not to report on iPhones blowing up, you can bet some random fucker at ZDNet or CNN or wherever would write the shit out of it and bathe in the millions of hits.

if you want to make the argument that apple threatens companies if they post unfavorable stories about apple (for instance, withholding review devices), then i'd be willing to entertain that claim, but at this point i'm making up your argument for you. at the very least, go find some news story reporting that much is happening.

there's no reason to believe that journalists are smart enough to keep a conspiracy going for more than 20 minutes. most people are just too stupid for that. you can't have your cake and eat it too, pointing out that journalists are inept but also competent enough to keep secret a wide-ranging conspiratorial cover-up

>The answer isn’t a mystery: innovation means pushing the boundaries
How fucking stupid are these guys? It was obviously because Samsung suits didn't give the engineers enough time, asked too much of them, and thought they could get away with it like they always do.

>>57860321
i mean it's never clear when you're designing a product in the lab whether your design is good enough. you're working on a reference unit and maybe it passes all the tests you dream up, and maybe you make a handful of prototypes and you and your team test them in every scenario you can all imagine, but then it turns out that a 1 in 1000 tolerance deviation in production causes the device to explode.

1 in 1000 isn't that high, but it's high enough that you'd see hundreds of units exploding once the product hits mass markets. samsung sold 19 million units. 1 in 1000 failure rate means close to 20,000 devices exploding.

i'm not saying that samsung did everything right here, but companies try to take shortcuts like this all the time. no company wants to manufacture a thousand or more devices to see if all of them pass tests. and even if you did that, if there was a fuckup that appears 1 in 10,000 times, that would still mean close to 2,000 exploding phones.

it looks like samsung thought their manufacturing design tolerances were right at the edge of state of the art, but they were evidently wrong. chalking it up to the executives pushing the engineers too hard makes it seem like there was a clear finish line that the engineers were supposed to get to that they couldn't reach. in practice, you're never 100% certain that you caught every issue, and the executives underestimated how much more testing was necessary.

to put it another way, you know when you're answering a multiple choice test whether you finished the test or not. you see all the questions and you fill in bubbles. if you're answering an essay question, though, you have no fucking clue if you've done enough or if you have to keep going. you might look at it and think "that's everything there is to say about this topic" but there's always an implicit "... i think".

>>57860440
No, there isn't a finish line. There's just an angry Korean man that doesn't understand what you're doing, but screaming at you to finish faster and deliver a better product.

I would bet money on the battery engineers for this having brought up the issue to superiors only for them to ignore it.

>>57860494
>I would bet money on the battery engineers for this having brought up the issue to superiors only for them to ignore it.
i definitely wouldn't. how many units exploded? 1,000? fewer? and the manufacturing processes before mass manufacturing tend to be much, much more carefully monitored.

the essay example is as apt as i can think. you might think that you could flesh out a section about X or Y, but you don't really know. and you can imagine writing more about basically any subject, but you decide not to because you would spend an eternity writing about a subject if you indulged in that impulse to say more.

i'm sure that behind literally every product launch there are people on every team who are worried they didn't satisfactorily evaluate their component. whether they discovered anything and covered it up is another question entirely, and i tend not to assume a conspiracy unless there's actual evidence of conspiracy (and not just a failure and not just potentially evidence of stupidity).

You guys do realize only extremely mentally ill (ie homosexuals) use iPhones, right?

>>57860605
how is that related to the samsung galaxy note 7's design causing batteries to explode?

are you in the wrong thread or is disorientation one of the symptoms of a mental disorder or what?

>>57859125
not him, but wasn't this somewhat obvious all along?

>>57861620
no. it could have been caused by overcharging, for instance.

>>57859445
You know the reports of Note 7 fires averaged at least two a day, right?

>>57860197
So what is this Android phone that owns 88% of the market?

>>57860545
It doesn't matter if not many actually exploded, the problem is that enough exploded to make the news. The damage to people's willingness to buy samsung is huge.

>>57860119
Until quite recently heatsinks on mobile phones were a sign of pockethousefires

>>57860119
The entire phone body is the heat sink, why do you think aluminum became popular with manufacturers for phone bodies?

File: 1470339748138.png (488KB, 640x877px) Image search: [Google]

488KB, 640x877px

>>57859798
>this story would be that much more tempting if you know nobody else will do it

>>57859917
I can hear your tin foil hat rustling all the way from here.

>>57860545
>i definitely wouldn't. how many units exploded? 1,000? fewer?
That hardly matters. It's more that they started exploding at a rate where there was a new one in the news practically every day within the first couple months.
If it had continued at that rate then there would have been thousands of exploded phones. It's not that it was just the defective ones failing quickly, it was pretty much a ticking bomb in all of them.

This is literally all just tech propaganda, i'm not even kidding. It's fucking sad what they are resorting to to try and delay the inevitable Apple crash.

>>57864535
The news is nothing but a string of nonsense put together to resemble events.
To quote Mark Twain:
"To not read the news makes you uninformed, but reading the news makes you misinformed."