On Wednesday, 28 June 2017 21:27:57 UTC+1, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Tue, 27 Jun 2017 10:51:24 +0100, whisky-dave wrote:

On Monday, 26 June 2017 17:33:42 UTC+1, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jun 2017 16:41:47 +0100, whisky-dave wrote:

I'm saying if you want to use your phone after 4 years, it should be openable, by you.

if you want a phone to last longer than 4 years then get one that can be opened don;t buy one that can't that's the key.
if no one brought phones that couldn't be opened up then they would be made would they.

But people don't know they can't be opened until they need to open them.

People arenl;t interested in opening their phone those days are long gone.

Why would someone expect a phone to be sealed?

Because people know they are, people rarely get TVs repaired , look for TV repair men in the local paper and that might give you a clue.
Few peole get their shoes rehealed either.
Few get their shoes polished either. When was the last time yuo saw someone get their trainsers resouled or cleaned.



Anyone manufacturing a phone you can't open yourself is artificially limiting it's life to 4 years, which is against the consumer goods act.

It's not against the consumer goods act, if it were then they'd be banned wouldn't they.

You have too much faith in the law.

it's NOT a law.

It's only a civil offence, people have to take them to court.

So when have Apple been taken to court for sealing their phones. ?


Just like you don't get the police round your door when you download Metallica. They have to sue you for damages.

Are you sure it's the police and not the local mental health support.


Anyway that's a totally differnt law.




yes, it's cost samsung quite a bit.
Maybe the saving on testing or spending money on a betteryh battery didnlt pay off this time, better luck next time perhaps.

It probably saved them a fortune actually.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38714461

The recall is thought to have cost $5.3bn (£4.3bn) and was hugely damaging for the South Korean firm's reputation.

They don't need to recall all of them. Probably some bull**** EU health and softy law.

Only an idiot would buy a phone that is being recalled for safety isssues.
Why pay full price for a faulty product.


Then they'll be repeating this saving on the samsun 8 then is that what you're saying, we'll wait and see if they start expolding.

But other than terrosists I don't really see a market for exploding phones do you ?

The chances of the exploding happening were quite low. They took the risk, they lost.

samsung lost, yes they did.
They lost a factory too didn't they, well part of one.



I'd buy the Samsung and change the battery.

Why buy a faulty battery spendign yuor own money on it, why not buy a fulling working phone instead of gettign one with a faulty battery in it ?