Aber anscheinend haben einige Iphone 7 ein deutliches Hitzeproblem, wie man hier im Forum auch lesen kann...Mittlerweile sind es 2, die angeben, daß ihre Geräte deutlich zu heiß werden...

Verbaut Apple eventuell die gleichen Akkus wie Samsung ?!?

wolltest du damit meine aussage unterstreichen?

denn die akkus der note 7 waren eine eigenentwicklung […] bisher hatte auch samsung akkus zugekauft.

Die Akkus fürs Note 7 stammen nämlich aus zwei Quellen, zum einen von der chinesischen Firma ATL und außerdem von Samsungs eigener Batterie-Sparte (Samsung SDI ), und dummerweise sind wohl Samsung-SDI-Akkus für sämtliche Note-7-Brände verantwortlich.

Insgesamt seien rund 70 Prozent der bislang produzierten Einheiten des Galaxy Note 7 mit einem SDI-Akku ausgestattet, die restlichen 30 Prozent stammten vom chinesischen Hersteller ATL.

nein. denn die [explodierten] akkus der note 7 waren eine eigenentwicklung, die bisher nirgendwo anders zum einsatz kamen als eben beim note 7.

boar.. goldwaage wieder ausgepackt?

samsungs erster versuch eigene akkus in ihre produkte zu packen..

Nein, aber ich denke, es ist bei der Bewertung der Sache keine ganz unwichtige Tatsache. Welche Samsung sicher enorm geholfen hat, so schnell und in so kurzer Zeit ausweichen zu können und die Akkus derzeit nun zu 100 % nur von ATL zu verbauen und die der eigenen Konzern-Tochter Samsung-SDI erstmal links liegenzulassen.

Klar hat er recht, Li-Ion hat bekannte inhärente Risiken.

Aber was hat das mit dem verlinkten Fall zu tun?

Du hast es so dargestellt, als habe Samsung einen ganz einfachen Weg, das aktuelle Problem zu beheben, indem sie nur noch ATL-Akkus verwenden.

Allem Anschein nach aber gibt es auch bei den Austauschgeräten Probleme. Also sind entweder die ATL-Akkus auch nicht die Lösung des Problems oder Samsung benutzt auch in den Austauschgeräten weiterhin SDI-Akkus.

Es ist auch angesichts der Sachlage insgesamt nicht angebracht, mit einem Hinweis auf die inhärente Li-Ion-Problematik den vorliegenden Fall zu verharmlosen bzw. verallgemeinern

da hier offensichtlich auf zweierlei Weise fahrlässig gehandelt wurde.

boar.. goldwaage wieder ausgepackt?
die explodierten sind von samsung... samsungs erster versuch eigene akkus in ihre produkte zu packen.. ging in die hose.. jetzt lassen sie es sein und setzen wieder mehr auf den zulieferer.

Nur um das nochmal ganz klarzustellen: dein Standpunkt ist, dass das in dieser Form jedem Smartphonehersteller hätte passieren können

und dass Samsung hier nicht ganz spezifisch fahrlässig gehandelt hat?

Ich glaube, du hast recht. Bezahlt weiß ich nicht, aber tendenziös auf jeden Fall.

... Grundsätzlichkeit ...

Das wundert mich aber, das kritisch gleich als tendenziös abgestempelt wird.

Und welche Tendenz soll das sein?

Samsung was aware that its replacement phones were catching fire five days ago. Another caught fire on Thursday (on an airplane), and then another on Friday in the hands of a thirteen-year old girl. That’s three in less than a week, with Samsung giving its customers little more than meaningless platitudes about "[taking] every report seriously" and that "customer safety remains our highest priority as we are investigating the matter." Except that’s a lie. If customer safety was really the highest priority, we would have seen statements from Samsung telling customers to stop using even their replacement phones after the fire on the Southwest flight on Thursday.

macster100:
Das wissen wir nicht.

... bis Mitte September 92 ...

Das wissen wir nicht.

Samsung’s engineers, on a tight deadline, initially concluded the defect was caused by faulty batteries from one of the company’s suppliers. Samsung, which announced a recall of the Note 7 devices in September, decided to continue shipping new Galaxy Note 7s containing batteries from a different supplier. The solution failed. Reports soon surfaced that some of the replacement devices were blowing up too. (…) As of this week, Samsung’s testers were still unable to reproduce the explosions. (…) Scotching the Note 7 does not end the questions facing Samsung. It still has not disclosed what specifically caused the Note 7s to smoke and catch fire — or even whether it knows what the problem was. (…)

The Galaxy Note 7 was one of the most ambitious products Samsung had begun marketing under the leadership of its vice chairman, Lee Jae-yong (…) Samsung’s fight to compete with Apple by cramming increasingly sophisticated features into the device may not have helped. Industry experts are scrutinizing Samsung’s supply chain to see whether the rush to market caused technical problems or led to corners being cut. Internally, Samsung’s corporate culture may also have compounded any issues. Two former Samsung employees, who asked not to be named for fear of retaliation from the company, described the workplace as militaristic, with a top-down approach where orders came from people high above who did not necessarily understand how product technologies actually worked. (…)

After the original Note 7s began running into exploding problems in August, Samsung initially concluded that the problem was batteries supplied by its subsidiary, Samsung SDI (…) The plates inside the SDI battery were too close to each other near its rounded corners, making it vulnerable to a short circuit, and the battery also had defects in its insulating tape and the coating of its negative electrode. (…) Samsung continued to ship Note 7s with ATL batteries, offering them as replacement phones. That decision backfired. “It was too quick to blame the batteries; I think there was nothing wrong with them or that they were not the main problem,” said Park Chul-wan, former director of the Center for Advanced Batteries at the Korea Electronics Technology Institute, who said he reviewed the regulatory agency’s documents.

It did not help that the hundreds of Samsung testers trying to pinpoint the problem could not easily communicate with one another: Fearing lawsuits and subpoenas, Samsung told employees involved in the testing to keep communications about the tests offline — meaning no emails were allowed, according to the person briefed on the process.

Mr. Park said he had talked with some Samsung engineers but none seemed to know what happened, nor were they able to replicate the problem. (…) “The problem seems to be far more complex,” Mr. Park said in a phone interview. “The Note 7 had more features and was more complex than any other phone manufactured. In a race to surpass iPhone, Samsung seems to have packed it with so much innovation it became uncontrollable.”

Ich geb's auf … schönes Leben noch.

King, of the Department of Energy, also pointed to the design of the phone as Samsung’s main problem.

“Think how much easier it would have been to manage the Note 7 problems, too, if it had been possible to simply remove the battery,” he said. “Addressing safety concerns by making the batteries removable in future generations will have the side-benefit of making the phones easier to recycle, too.”

Smartphone manufacturers argue that consumers rarely replace their own batteries, and obviously the demand for better battery life is a constant on consumers’ lists of demands. But a mess like this shows that there are multiple reasons to make batteries easier to replace.

“This isn’t going to be the last time we see a device with an overheating or exploding battery. We are building little bombs into every single electronic device we use, and there’s a lot of challenging chemistry,” Wiens said. “The batteries in these phones are at 90 percent of their theoretical maximum energy you can pack into that chemistry. When you try to push that to 91 percent, you have this tradeoff between the battery life we want and safety. We’re pushing closer and closer to the safe line with every generation of phone that comes out.”