Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Samsung to Permanently Discontinue Galaxy Note 7 Smartphone

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 333 posts

Re: Samsung to Permanently Discontinue Galaxy Note 7 Smartphone

#241

Post by Nursie »

M_Grey wrote: post #236
Nursie wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's obviously not good but yes, you were an idiot to say it could be the end of Samsung. They make everything from cutting edge phones to air-conditioning. One product in one business area going wrong like this is not going to be fatal.

There was probably a way to get your point across without calling someone an idiot, and if not, you didn't have a point in the first place.

Read the context - I was merely echoing what was written there.

I wouldn't have initiated such name-calling, but I do think the OP's reaction is over the top and silly, given the context.

Re: Samsung to Permanently Discontinue Galaxy Note 7 Smartphone

#242

Post by etrevino »

kalleboo wrote: post #226
PaulRobinson wrote: post #14

[drip, drip, drip, drip, drip…] They have spent a huge amount of money on marketing this phone. I wrote a week or so back it could be the end of Samsung and people told me I was an idiot - they make so many other things, their spread is so broad, they can just produce the next phone and move on. This has done untold damage to their brand in the eyes of the average consumer and has wasted so much money, I think they a…

They could just rebrand. Here in Japan, Korean companies are unpopular so they're just branded "Galaxy" with no "Samsung" to be seen.

Is that because of longstanding racial animosity or some other reason?

Re: Samsung to Permanently Discontinue Galaxy Note 7 Smartphone

#243

Post by my123 »

mcculley wrote: post #50
RGamma wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe next time they'll offer replaceable batteries, which would have made this situation much less painful and is generally a plus for consumers anyway...

To make the battery replaceable while still providing the same amount of energy would require a thicker case around the battery, thicker contacts, and a discrete accessible compartment in the phone. All of this adds up to a much bigger phone. The days of replaceable batteries are over.

The Lumia x5x series has both USB Type C, is thin, and has a removable battery.

Re: Samsung to Permanently Discontinue Galaxy Note 7 Smartphone

#244

Post by bogomipz »

efvxcgci wrote: post #194
metafunctor wrote: post #88

The subject says it all, but am I the only one who isn't a subscriber of the Wall Street Journal? Is there no free source on the Internet for this same piece of news? I'm not saying everything should be free. I build paid-for services on the web myself. But how is “To Read the Full Story, Subscribe or Sign In” useful on the Hacker News?

Plus, if you give in and subscribe to the WSJ they go out of their way to make it difficult to unsubscribe, requiring users to call in by phone and be subjected to a sales pitch just to cancel the recurring charges. It's a very scummy retention tactic.

Is this true for a digital only subscription as well?

Re: Samsung to Permanently Discontinue Galaxy Note 7 Smartphone

#245

Post by godson_drafty »

creshal wrote: post #106
walterbell wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do batteries need to be unique for each model? Some laptop lines (e.g. Lenovo) share removable batteries among models with similar power needs. Same used to be true of phones which had removable batteries from the same phone vendor.

That was before flagship phones needed to become thinner and bigger every few months. Can't have commonality of parts if your six months old battery is thicker than the whole new phone. (There's still plenty of phones with replaceable, more-or-less standardized batteries available… but it's $50-200 phones that nobody wants to buy because they're not sexy enough. Even though they've been fast enough for years…)

Another problem with $50-200 phones is horrible cameras.

Re: Samsung to Permanently Discontinue Galaxy Note 7 Smartphone

#246

Post by khedoros1 »

quantumhobbit wrote: post #94
metafunctor wrote: post #88

The subject says it all, but am I the only one who isn't a subscriber of the Wall Street Journal? Is there no free source on the Internet for this same piece of news? I'm not saying everything should be free. I build paid-for services on the web myself. But how is “To Read the Full Story, Subscribe or Sign In” useful on the Hacker News?

Use the web link at the top. Even better is that you get an AMP version of the story.

That hasn't worked for me, for several months now. I've had good luck with a Firefox add-on called Paywall-pass, though.

Re: Samsung to Permanently Discontinue Galaxy Note 7 Smartphone

#247

Post by novaleaf »

arjie wrote: post #204
richardboegli wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bloomberg actually had it almost two hours earlier than WSJ. I've just posted it to HN just now. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12684081

Yeah, but Bloomberg publishes a lot of rubbish. Rumours and lots of secondary news, so you never know if it is true.

re: the parent's downvoters:

ok, so @arjie is a bit on the snarky side, but he does have a point.

Re: Samsung to Permanently Discontinue Galaxy Note 7 Smartphone

#248

Post by catdog »

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #132
PaulRobinson wrote: post #14

[drip, drip, drip, drip, drip…] They have spent a huge amount of money on marketing this phone. I wrote a week or so back it could be the end of Samsung and people told me I was an idiot - they make so many other things, their spread is so broad, they can just produce the next phone and move on. This has done untold damage to their brand in the eyes of the average consumer and has wasted so much money, I think they a…

I completely disagree. People love shiny and they have a short memory even though there's this wonderful thing called the internet that can remember things for them. All Samsung has to do is come out with something shiny and people will be buying it and blogging about it. People still buy Ford cars even though they made the Pinto and their SUVs used Firestone tires. People still buy Toyota without even a thought as t…

I agree with the disagreement, we are also not talking about some one trick pony which solely depends on successfully selling this thing. Samsung as a whole and even the consumer electronics part alone is a massive and diversified conglomerate. They should be easily able to swallow the financial losses of such a failure in a single product category and let it survive during a bit of a lean period until customers regain trust which may even be not that long.

Re: Samsung to Permanently Discontinue Galaxy Note 7 Smartphone

#249

Post by daenney »

Nursie wrote: post #241
M_Grey wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was probably a way to get your point across without calling someone an idiot, and if not, you didn't have a point in the first place.

Read the context - I was merely echoing what was written there. I wouldn't have initiated such name-calling, but I do think the OP's reaction is over the top and silly, given the context.

That doesn't excuse repeating it. You could've easily gotten the point across that you agree with their assessment without going with those words.

Re: Samsung to Permanently Discontinue Galaxy Note 7 Smartphone

#250

Post by jhatax »

PaulRobinson wrote: post #14

[drip, drip, drip, drip, drip…] They have spent a huge amount of money on marketing this phone. I wrote a week or so back it could be the end of Samsung and people told me I was an idiot - they make so many other things, their spread is so broad, they can just produce the next phone and move on. This has done untold damage to their brand in the eyes of the average consumer and has wasted so much money, I think they a…

If this were the case, VW would surely have abandoned ship and shuttered their factories. They haven't. Similar situation with BP - they are not in the doldrums.

People have short-term memories and will vote with their wallets if they see a new product that seems "worth the cost" of ownership.

Post reply on HN