To get around the Subscribe block just copy the title, use google.com and put the title in quotes. The reference from Google.com will get around the subscription wall if your IP has not viewed too many articles that month
The Fatal Mistake That Doomed Samsung’s Galaxy Note
21–30 of 37 posts
Re: The Fatal Mistake That Doomed Samsung’s Galaxy Note
#22To get around the Subscribe block just copy the title, use google.com and put the title in quotes. The reference from Google.com will get around the subscription wall if your IP has not viewed too many articles that month
Or just use the 'web' link under the title.
Re: The Fatal Mistake That Doomed Samsung’s Galaxy Note
#23Following the 'web' link doesn't seem to get me through the paywall anymore. How am I supposed to read this article?
Re: The Fatal Mistake That Doomed Samsung’s Galaxy Note
#24Re: The Fatal Mistake That Doomed Samsung’s Galaxy Note
#25I expected the article to say what made the phones catch fire.
Defective battery according to CNet: https://www.cnet.com/news/why-is-samsung-galaxy-note-7-explo... Even replacement phones caught fire, they blamed the batteries.
No sh&t, battery? Who would have thought? I assumed it was CPU heated to sillicon's ignition temperature.
Re: The Fatal Mistake That Doomed Samsung’s Galaxy Note
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's getting old. I don't use the web link anymore either.
Why is it getting old? Still working for me at least.
Most posts, I'll open the article and comments. Read the article, then the comments. For WSJ posts, I'll load the comments, then decide if I want to bother with the Google trick. If I'm at work, I'll probably skip the whole post, because even if I'm interested in the topic, the Google trick doesn't work there.
They're the only place I see regularly where I have to do some workaround to view the content. They clearly have the intention of finding paying users, and I have no interest in paying. Using work-arounds to bypass that brings it more starkly to mind, with a little twinge of almost-guilt each time. It's easier to just skip the story, unless it's something extraordinarily interesting.
Re: The Fatal Mistake That Doomed Samsung’s Galaxy Note
#27According to the article, the mistake was admitting there was a problem and recalling the phones.
If that's what Wall Street calls a "mistake", then I don't know what they'd call the engineering problem(s) that caused the fires in the first place.
Re: The Fatal Mistake That Doomed Samsung’s Galaxy Note
#28Following the 'web' link doesn't seem to get me through the paywall anymore. How am I supposed to read this article?
Don't bother. The article doesn't actually deliver what the headline promises.
Re: The Fatal Mistake That Doomed Samsung’s Galaxy Note
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
They don't know the root cause.
Which is what made me interested in reading the article--from the headline I thought it had finally been found.
I'm curious too, and I'm probably going to stay interested until they finally conclude something. Hundreds of thousands of handsets returned, billions of dollars lost, and nobody knows why.
Re: The Fatal Mistake That Doomed Samsung’s Galaxy Note
#30As an avid iPhone user who does want to see Apple succeed. I genuinely feel horrible for Samsung. You can say whatever you want about corporate management at any company but at the bottom of the pole are hard working engineers who put so much time and effort into their work. The team that built the iris scanner must have worked incredibly hard with cutting edge technology to make that work in time. So the whole team…
> I really hope they don't discontinue the line As in, stop making a 5.5"+ phone with stylus? They definitely won't. They'll just have to come up with a new name because the Note name is tarnished
Is it? I would've thought the samsung brand was tarnished more than the note brand.