×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Samsung Blames Galaxy SIII Burn On "External Energy Source"

timothy posted about 2 years ago | from the but-I-used-the-defrost-setting dept.

Cellphones 169

MojoKid writes "Samsung has some great news for Galaxy SIII smartphone owners. As it turns out, your mobile device isn't at risk of overheating to the point where it catches on fire and burns through its casing, as a forum member at Boards.ie claimed was the case with his Galaxy SIII a couple of weeks ago. [Note: And has since retracted.] Fire Investigations UK (FIUK), an independent third-party organization, assisted Samsung with looking into the matter, and here's what they concluded: 'The energy source responsible for generating the heat has been determined as external to the device... the device was not responsible for the cause of the fire,' FIUK said in a statement. 'The only way it was possible to produce damage similar to the damage recorded within the owner's damaged device was to place the devices or component parts within a domestic microwave.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

169 comments

If I remember correctly... (5, Informative)

bemymonkey (1244086) | about 2 years ago | (#40589271)

... the user who initially complained admitted that a buddy of his had tried to repair the phone after it had come in contact with an unknown amount of water... and of course, he promptly retracted his complaint.

What a jackass.

For everyone else: DON'T PUT YOUR FUCKING PHONE IN THE MICROWAVE.

Re:If I remember correctly... (5, Insightful)

src1138 (212903) | about 2 years ago | (#40589353)

And yet this still makes the front page of Slashdot - with a spin-laden misleading title.

MojoKid - you are an ass, and so is the moderator.

Re:If I remember correctly... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40589391)

Slashdot is essentially a marketing site for Apple and Microsoft.

Re:If I remember correctly... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40589507)

What the fuck? You appear to be seeing the world through rose tinted (Google) glasses.

Re:If I remember correctly... (0, Troll)

million_monkeys (2480792) | about 2 years ago | (#40589589)

And yet this still makes the front page of Slashdot - with a spin-laden misleading title.

MojoKid - you are an ass, and so is the moderator.

What is misleading about the title? The investigation report stated: "The energy source responsible for generating the heat has been determined as external to the device". Looks to me like the title accurately describes what was reported.

Re:If I remember correctly... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40589691)

MojoKid and million_monkeys sure do look like Apple shareholders.

An accurate title would be:
Kid microwaves phone and blames Samsung when phone explodes

Re:If I remember correctly... (5, Insightful)

asdf7890 (1518587) | about 2 years ago | (#40589707)

A fairer title might have been "Idiot puts phone in microwave, phone and phone's manufacturer found unlike to be to blame".

Depending on how you read the title as it currently stands (Samsung Blames Galaxy SIII Burn On "External Energy Source") it could suggest there is a question of Samsung being to blame and that they are trying to pass the buck.

Re:If I remember correctly... (4, Funny)

cc1984_ (1096355) | about 2 years ago | (#40589971)

A fairer title might have been "Idiot puts phone in microwave, phone and phone's manufacturer found unlike to be to blame".

You even managed to work a typo into the title, more in keeping with proper Slashdot submissions. Nice work :)

Re:If I remember correctly... (3, Informative)

zippthorne (748122) | about 2 years ago | (#40589853)

It's in scare quotes, though, which were unnecessary as the title is "Samsung Blames..." rather than "Galaxy Burn Was Caused by..."

Re:If I remember correctly... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40589877)

As someone who studies psycholinguistics, my beef with the summary is mainly with "As it turns out, your mobile device isn't at risk of overheating to the point where it catches on fire and burns through its casing, as a forum member at Boards.ie claimed ".

This is clever and misleading use of negation. Negation is used to introduce the presupposition that there was reason to think something could have been considered the case, and there are quite a few studies showing that people often take away the 'negated' proposition. that is, you tell them "not x" and they remember "x". This occurs particularly when 'not x' doesn't really mean much.. I mean.. what's so interesting in the fact that a phone won't spontaneously combust?

So there's misleading, and there's playing on psychology, and I think the latter is as bad as the former

Re:If I remember correctly... (2)

matunos (1587263) | about 2 years ago | (#40589363)

I'm guessing once the device had hit water, he decided to toast it in the microwave with the hopes of still getting a replacement citing a defective device.

Re:If I remember correctly... (3, Informative)

ls671 (1122017) | about 2 years ago | (#40589599)

Samsung sgh-a847 - also called rugby - can be dropped in water and used right away. It happened to me a few times. It is certified to military standard 810G. Buy something military grade like this if you break your phone often.

Re:If I remember correctly... (4, Funny)

jtownatpunk.net (245670) | about 2 years ago | (#40589477)

Duh. Microwaves are strictly for drying dogs. Everyone knows not to put metal in the microwave.

Re:If I remember correctly... (4, Funny)

million_monkeys (2480792) | about 2 years ago | (#40589607)

Duh. Microwaves are strictly for drying dogs. Everyone knows not to put metal in the microwave.

But make sure you take the collar and tags off before drying the dog!!!!! I forgot to do that before putting Scrapy in the microwave. It did not end well. My poor daughter cried for a week straight after this. I felt horrible. If only I had taken his collar off first, this tragedy could have been averted.

Re:If I remember correctly... (1)

JosKarith (757063) | about 2 years ago | (#40589651)

Did you have your dog microchipped? I hear those things don't survive a trip through a microwave very well.

Re:If I remember correctly... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40590381)

But everyone knows that the Galaxy SIII is made of plastic. Only the iPhone 4 is made of metal.

Re:If I remember correctly... (4, Funny)

Nyder (754090) | about 2 years ago | (#40589711)

For everyone else: DON'T PUT YOUR FUCKING PHONE IN THE MICROWAVE.

yes, the microwave is for organic stuff, like drying your pet. Or your baby.

Re:If I remember correctly... (4, Informative)

oddaddresstrap (702574) | about 2 years ago | (#40589881)

For the love of God, NO! Don't believe the post above!
Please, future information seeker, I'm talking to you...

The person above was KIDDING! Do not dry your baby, cat, dog, hamster, mouse, whatever, in a microwave! It will kill them!
Okay, maybe that's slightly too broad a statement. For some odd reason it works fine for drying Pekingese dogs.

Re:If I remember correctly... (5, Funny)

damien_kane (519267) | about 2 years ago | (#40590399)

The person above was KIDDING! Do not dry your baby, cat, dog, hamster, mouse, whatever, in a microwave! It will kill them!

+1, this ^^
Use your old-school tumble-dryer instead.
It takes a bit longer, but the risk of explosions is much lower.

Re:If I remember correctly... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40589733)

Actually the user manual of my microwave oven has specific warnings forbidding the user to put alive creatures inside the oven, but nothing is said about cellphones.

GO BURN IT IN THE OVEN!!!!

Re:If I remember correctly... (1)

isorox (205688) | about 2 years ago | (#40589835)

For everyone else: DON'T PUT YOUR FUCKING PHONE IN THE MICROWAVE.

a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jr6tMinjE2M">Or your hamster

(Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.)

Re:If I remember correctly... (1)

FranktehReaver (2441748) | about 2 years ago | (#40590171)

Maybe he was yelling? Seems to me that if you have to tell someone that you probably will have to yell it. I think it was probably done intentionally in hopes that Samsung would throw money at them to be quiet.

Re:If I remember correctly... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40590335)

So, don't do this [youtube.com]?

Re:If I remember correctly... (1)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about 2 years ago | (#40590607)

What jackass puts a soaked phone in the microwave to dry it out?

Probably the same guy desperately in need of a grammar bot for his tweets.

I guess the next question is.... (5, Funny)

Apothem (1921856) | about 2 years ago | (#40589273)

Will it blend?

Re:I guess the next question is.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40590181)

The way cell phones are growing, not for much longer. You won't be able to get them into the blender!

Let me get this straight (5, Insightful)

LordLucless (582312) | about 2 years ago | (#40589285)

So it's not Samsung doing the blaming, it's an independent, third party investigating party. And the scare quotes around the mysterious "External Energy Source" actually refer to a microwave, which the owner's friend apparently used to dry out his phone.

So, why wasn't the title "Microwave discovered to be cause of Galaxy SIII Burn"? Why are we trying to spin the headline to make it look like Samsung's making excuses for itself?

Re:Let me get this straight (4, Funny)

jpate (1356395) | about 2 years ago | (#40589295)

So, why wasn't the title "Microwave discovered to be cause of Galaxy SIII Burn"? Why are we trying to spin the headline to make it look like Samsung's making excuses for itself?

mmmm, a conspiracy theory about this community's propensity for conspiracy theories... nice!

Re:Let me get this straight (1)

devitto (230479) | about 2 years ago | (#40590183)

...and that title won't make people think the S3 is GENERATING microwaves ?

Context, context, context.....

Re:Let me get this straight (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40589341)

why wasn't the title "Microwave discovered to be cause of Galaxy SIII Burn"? Why are we trying to spin the headline to make it look like Samsung's making excuses for itself?

Probably due to laziness. The title in TFA is the same, so probably just cut & paste.

Agree! (1)

tanveer1979 (530624) | about 2 years ago | (#40589345)

I read the post in the forum.
Here is what it says
I would like to retract my original statement. The damage to the phone was caused by another person, although they were attempting to recover the phone from water this later caused the damage shown on the phone. It occurred due to a large amount of external energy and there was no fault with the phone. This was not a deliberate act but a stupid mistake.

I am unable to comment any further.

So they put the phone in a microwave to dry it after it was submerged in water!
I never think i would be surprised by stupidity.... and then this comes along.

Re:Agree! (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | about 2 years ago | (#40589387)

I never think i would be surprised by stupidity....

Well the site does have a ".ie" suffix...

Re:Agree! (1)

Chrisq (894406) | about 2 years ago | (#40589575)

I never think i would be surprised by stupidity....

Well the site does have a ".ie" suffix...

You think they would label them "do not Microwave" for the Irish market

Not on topic but how is this (3, Insightful)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | about 2 years ago | (#40589527)

A new MMO has launched, The Secret World. In the game you have an inventory WINDOW. In help one player asked how you could resize it... hint, it is a window. SAME WAY YOU DO IT IN EVERY OS!

You have to wonder how that person even manages to turn on a computer.

But people like this are not "stupid" in that they don't know things, they just lack or are to lazy to put two and two together. "If I have seen furthest, it is because I stood on the shoulders of giants".

These people stand on the ground. They can't link experiences from the past into the present. That user I mentioned might well have resized windows on windows but he couldn't make the connection that the inventory window looks and behaves as a window too. Lazyness comes into it since a non-lazy person would have tried something. For instance, dealing with chat windows. Right-click to change settings. How lazy do you got to be to not be able to even TRY that before asking?

A quest button is on the right, if clicked you can select a different quest to track. Yet people ask how to do that because it doesn't occur to them to simply try some stuff.

Manuals, message of the day are useless for these people.

The person from the article probably did see some video of metal in a microwave. Probably knows it is not an oven. Knows that plastic melts and just didn't put it together. For every person who pulls a radio apart to see how it looks inside, there is another person who never "learns" the power icon because it never occurs to them that there might be a reason for that image on the button.

When you do design, you sadly got to take these people into account.

Another example? Well, if one user was on slashdot, they would ask how you can preview a post. Clothes in the cash shop have preview button right there in your face and she couldn't see it and bitched they should have included a preview option. A button labelled preview and you miss it. Those people would microwave a phone to dry it.

Re:Not on topic but how is this (1)

zippthorne (748122) | about 2 years ago | (#40589929)

A new MMO has launched, The Secret World. In the game you have an inventory WINDOW. In help one player asked how you could resize it... hint, it is a window. SAME WAY YOU DO IT IN EVERY OS!

Well, for one thing, that varies:

Windows - Drag any edge
OS X - Drag any edge but the top
OS X (pre Lion) - Drag the lower right corner
Linux - Drag any edge or corner or use hotkey & mouse (Gnome - edges and corners have a small target width)

Next, if a user is extrapolating that something that could be done in various OSs might work in your game, and which is supposed to work in the game, but is unable to do so, perhaps the functionality is broken for that user and they want to confirm that it's not, in fact, user error that is causing the problem before submitting a bug report....

Re:Let me get this straight (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40589347)

So, why wasn't the title "Microwave discovered to be cause of Galaxy SIII Burn"?

"Darwin award nominee dries his smartphone in the microwave" would've been even better!

Re:Let me get this straight (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40589381)

You have to die stupidly in order to become a DA nominee. If just doing something incredibly stupid was enough, the dawn thing would have about 7,2 billion nominees.

Re:Let me get this straight (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40589493)

Ok, ok...

"Future Darwin nominee dries his smartphone in the microwave". There, all better.

Re:Let me get this straight (3, Funny)

geminidomino (614729) | about 2 years ago | (#40589679)

Technically, you don't have to die, just remove yourself from the gene pool. If you've got no kids and, through some act of stupidity, manage to reduce your gonads to the texture and consistency of lumpy oatmeal, you're still eligible.

Of course, at that point, I'd probably rather be dead, myself.

Re:Let me get this straight (0)

gabriel (2115) | about 2 years ago | (#40589401)

Technically the chain of evidence was broken when the guy gave the phone to Samsung, who then forwarded it to Fire Investigations UK.

We'll never be sure if it was in fact the same phone.

Re:Let me get this straight (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40589593)

I know reading the article is a lot of work, but in fact even the summary mentions the fact that the user has since retracted his original claims. In the linked page he admits that the phone was indeed microwaved.

Re:Let me get this straight (1)

gabriel (2115) | about 2 years ago | (#40589655)

I know reading the articles *and* linked resources is a lot of work but if you do you'll see the guy says "I am unable to comment any further."

He's obviously under some sort of legal agreement with Samsung.

Re:Let me get this straight (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40589811)

Or he is too fucking embarrassed by his own stupidity not just for zapping the phone in a microwave oven, but also posting about it in a public forum, and just doesn't want to say any more.

That comment also could have been made for want of avoiding further self-incrimination.

Re:Let me get this straight (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40589403)

because Microsoft is paying for these headlines?

Re:Let me get this straight (5, Funny)

antifoidulus (807088) | about 2 years ago | (#40589479)

What a moron, EVERYONE knows that the only real way to dry cell phones is to put them in the toaster.

Re:Let me get this straight (4, Funny)

MickLinux (579158) | about 2 years ago | (#40589529)

Could we just get this over with and put it on ASK SLASHDOT? I'm waiting...

Re:Let me get this straight (5, Informative)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | about 2 years ago | (#40589973)

Put your phone in a zip-lock bag and pour a load of rice in with it. Seal the bag and leave it for a couple of days. Alternatively, if you're a nerd like me, slip in four or five silica gel pouches you've hidden away.

Re:Let me get this straight (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40589697)

Headline written by Apple fanboy, I'm guessing.

Re:Let me get this straight (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40589869)

It's about hits, which are currency for the web. Sensationalism and borderline lies = hits. Very few people would open this page if it had a more accurate title.

License for mobile phones (4, Funny)

gnasher719 (869701) | about 2 years ago | (#40589315)

I suggest that people should need a license to use advanced technology like mobile phones. And someone sticking their mobile phone into a microwave should lose that license for life.

Re:License for mobile phones (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40589439)

Stupid people owning their shiny toys subsidise the manufacture of advanced electronics for the rest of us. They are a guaranteed money source for any high tech junk that shares components with the real fun stuff.

Instead of rescinding a license, I would suggest simply slapping them.

Re:License for mobile phones (1)

azalin (67640) | about 2 years ago | (#40589523)

What about an "idiot" stamp to the forehead that doesn't wash of for a while. Maybe an ink based on KMnO4 or something similar. That way the rest of us can get a good lough him.

Re:License for mobile phones (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40589773)

What about an "idiot" stamp to the forehead... That way the rest of us can get a good lough him.

Oh the irony.

Re:License for mobile phones (5, Insightful)

StripedCow (776465) | about 2 years ago | (#40589499)

I suggest that people should need a license to use advanced technology like mobile phones.

That may cost Apple its market share.

Re:License for mobile phones (0)

Henriok (6762) | about 2 years ago | (#40589549)

Ah! You hint to a belief that those who buys iPhones are techically challenged, and if they were to be banned from buying Apple products Apple would suffer. No, that's probably not accurate. Thanks for playing.

Re:License for mobile phones (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40590003)

BURN! StripedCow never saw that coming!

Re:License for mobile phones (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40590475)

Not all iPhone users are technically challenged, but technically challenged smartphone buyers take the iPhone.

Re:License for mobile phones (1)

gnasher719 (869701) | about 2 years ago | (#40589749)

That may cost Apple its market share.

That would cost Apple some customers (customers that you really don't want as your customers, actually), but I doubt it would cost them market share.

Re:License for mobile phones (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40589517)

He probably would need an license for the microwave :-)

Re:License for mobile phones (1)

roman_mir (125474) | about 2 years ago | (#40589571)

And I suggest an EASY REPAIR to this problem.

The owner of this phone should immediately try it, it will help, here is the recipe: stick your fucking head in the microwave, turn it on, and then file a support complaint with your mother for giving birth to a defective unit.

Re:License for mobile phones (1)

gedeco (696368) | about 2 years ago | (#40589717)

Unfortunately, You can't operate a Microwave without closing the door.
I believe the idiot is to big for closing the lid.

Re:License for mobile phones (1)

roman_mir (125474) | about 2 years ago | (#40589757)

sure you can, use a knife or a screw driver to push the safety button in, or break the glass with the head and don't even open the door, should work.

Don't need Sherlock for this one (5, Informative)

Teknikal69 (1769274) | about 2 years ago | (#40589335)

Heat was very obviously external as the outside was melted and the inside was only slightly marked, the story would probably have been called out as dubious right away if the army of Apple fanboys hadn't seized on it started posting it everywhere and ignoring all the evidence.

Even I'm surprised someone was stupid enough to put their phone in a microwave mind you.

Re:Don't need Sherlock for this one (2)

gabriel (2115) | about 2 years ago | (#40589435)

Well according to the report "the heat damage to the device appears to have been generated from within the device".

So no, the heat was internal although in this case possibly induced by the microwave oven.

Don't microwave ovens cook from the inside out? (1)

k(wi)r(kipedia) (2648849) | about 2 years ago | (#40589455)

Heat was very obviously external as the outside was melted and the inside was only slightly marked [...]

It might still be the case (pun unintended) that a microwave was used as the heat source. However, I've always been told that microwave ovens burn things from the inside (where there are more trapped water molecules to excite) out (presumably drier since the skin can be wiped prior to microwaving).

My own experience when using a microwave to toast bread is that the center gets burnt. Which isn't exactly the inside of the bread, but I haven't microwaved anything thicker than pizza to find out if I can, say burn the filling of a turkey before the skin gets done.

Re:Don't microwave ovens cook from the inside out? (1)

mutube (981006) | about 2 years ago | (#40589751)

Microwaves cook 'inside out' at the cellular level. That is they heat the water which in turn cooks the yummy protein and carbohydrate.

Cook a chicken fillet and the outside is most definitely cooked before the inside presumably because the microwaves have to get through the water nearer the surface to reach the middle. As the outside of the meat dries they can penetrate further - in much the same way as heat in an conventional oven.

Re:Don't microwave ovens cook from the inside out? (4, Interesting)

Rogue974 (657982) | about 2 years ago | (#40590747)

Microwaves create a standing wave from the point of source. The waves are at the right frequency to excite the water molecules.

They don't really cook from the inside out, they cook from the point where the waves hit the water molecules at the wave high and low points. There is a yummy experiement you can perform to demonstrate the speed of light by looking at the waves created in a microwave and see how microwaves actually work.

First: Remove the rotating glass dish at the bottom of the microwave. You need what you are putting in the microwave to remain stationary.
Second: Get twix, kit kat, or some other long thin candy bar, preferably cholcolate as it has water in it and place them on a plate in the microwave going from left to right. The Microwave source is behind the keypad and time and it shoots across the microwave to the other side.
Third: Turn on the microwave and watch.

You will see that spots will start to melt on the candy at which point you can turn off the microwave. The spots on the candy are the high and low points of the standing wave and are the points that were heated. It doens't matter inside the food or outside the food, it matters where the wave hits the food. Most people say it cooks from the inside out, but if you think about your food, the outside is a very small layer of the food while the inside is the bulk of the food. The chances of the wave focusing on the outside are insanely small compared to the chances of the heat points being on the inside.

If you want to verify the speed of light, it has to do with knowing the speed of light and equtions that deal with the frequency and amplitude of waves, you can measure the distance between the melted points on the candy bar, look up the frequency of the wave the microwave generates and verify the equations.

Oh, and don't forget to eat the candy.

http://morningcoffeephysics.com/measuring-the-speed-of-light-with-chocolate-and-a-microwave-oven/ [morningcoffeephysics.com]

A link to a more detailed explanation of the experiment and equations. So it isn't that a microwave cooks from the inside out, it cooks at the peaks and troughs of the standing wave, which have a much greater chance of cocentrating the heat on the inside.

Re:Don't need Sherlock for this one (1)

azalin (67640) | about 2 years ago | (#40589497)

Even I'm surprised someone was stupid enough to put their phone in a microwave mind you.

Actually that sounds like a fun project. Done outside, from a distance, with an old phone, a to-be-thrown-away microwave, a rather long extension cord and a timer. Oh and a video camera with a good zoom on a tripod.

Re:Don't need Sherlock for this one (1)

bruce_the_loon (856617) | about 2 years ago | (#40589689)

Go and watch Brainiac, they did this repeatedly with spectacular results.

Re:Don't need Sherlock for this one (1)

azalin (67640) | about 2 years ago | (#40590591)

I do know that I could simply open youtube and have a wide selection, but nothing beats blowing things up err "experimenting" yourself. Just know your limits and keep your distance. My old chemistry teacher used to say that the main reason so many chemists wear beards is to hide the scars.

Re:Don't need Sherlock for this one (1)

Kjella (173770) | about 2 years ago | (#40589945)

Even I'm surprised someone was stupid enough to put their phone in a microwave mind you.

A woman I know of managed to lose her cell phone in the toilet, which is clumsy. But she felt it was so yucky to reach in and grab it, she decided to flush it first... Granted, alcohol was involved but you're still pretty retarded when you do that. And while I haven't put a cell phone in the microwave, years ago we had these plates with engraving that I didn't think about was metal. It was quite the lightning show. Most of that shit happen simply because you aren't even thinking about it.

Microwave, anyone?? (0)

Eyeball97 (816684) | about 2 years ago | (#40589389)

FFS what is this doing on the front page?

Not only is it OLD NEWS but the mouth-breather in question already admitted he microwaved the bloody thing after he got it wet...

Re:Microwave, anyone?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40589437)

No, the "mouth-breather" did not say that, you stupid fuck.

Re:Microwave, anyone?? (1)

Eyeball97 (816684) | about 2 years ago | (#40589543)

Are we speaking about a different "dilo2k10"?

But anyway you're absolutely right. All he did was lie about it bursting into flames while he drove - he didn't admit he microwaved it.

He did admit that another mouth-breather attempted to recover the phone from water and applied a "large amount of external energy" to it.

I suspect there is a 'd' missing from his online handle.

"Dilo2k10" Quote: "The damage to the phone was caused by another person, although they were attempting to recover the phone from water this later caused the damage shown on the phone. It occurred due to a large amount of external energy and there was no fault with the phone. This was not a deliberate act but a stupid mistake."

Slashdot is a tabloid now? (5, Informative)

iB1 (837987) | about 2 years ago | (#40589413)

Seriously this is disappointing. I'm getting better quality news and stories from "tabloid" websites such as The Register and The Inquirer now. Slashdot is starting to resemble a blog full of random ramblings than a good quality, reliable news source.

Re:Slashdot is a tabloid now? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40589709)

Can't expect much when editors of tech sites own Apple shares

It'd be interesting (1)

aglider (2435074) | about 2 years ago | (#40589485)

to know why on earth you would

place the devices or component parts within a domestic microwave.

Unless you live by eating well-done devices!

Re:It'd be interesting (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40589643)

The microwave is an excellent way to dry out things that are wet, by boiling off the water. It's also great for disinfecting those grimy touch screens. The Galaxy SIII is apparently not made of very durable materials.

GLWT (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40589565)

"damaged device was to place the devices or component parts within a domestic microwave."

Since we all know that UK doesn't produce anything except pasty white people, its obvious that in 2012 a domestic microwave is going to be a little hard to come by.

A clever ploy for Samsung to advertise their foreign microwaves.

/. could try harder... (3, Informative)

awjr (1248008) | about 2 years ago | (#40589667)

You really really need to investigate further before posting these stories. Samsung didn't "blame" it on external sources which implies "it wasn't really us, honest, seriously". The guy that posted the initial fire report had a friend 'drop' the phone into water then attempt to dry it out using a microwave.

"Galaxy SIII burn caused by microwaving wet phone" is what it should be.

Timothy (0)

Areyoukiddingme (1289470) | about 2 years ago | (#40589729)

I used to think the reports of timothy's failures at reporting were overblown. Now I know better. Talk about an epic failure. Why does this guy still have a job?

Re:Timothy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40589777)

You call this a job?

Re:Timothy (1)

mister2au (1707664) | about 2 years ago | (#40589935)

Normally I'd hit this up with a "troll" moderation ...

But you may actually have a point there somewhere ... a quick re-write of some of these summary wouldn't go astray - or perhaps just skipping some of the stories all together.

Editors: Read so you don't commit libel! (0)

mattr (78516) | about 2 years ago | (#40589813)

Considering TFA and the use of the word "blames" and the quotes around "external energy source" I would say Slashdot is very close if not smack on the dot of committing libel.

A wet phone was put in a microwave oven. Slashdot's story title suggests the manufacturer is an outright liar.

Strange phrasing (1)

vlm (69642) | about 2 years ago | (#40589819)

Look how strange the phrasing is. One ultra vague statement and one hyperspecific statement. Is this a legal thing like the first statement is for the law courts complete with perjury danger while the second statement is PR spin, or is it just weird?

'The energy source responsible for generating the heat has been determined as external to the device... the device was not responsible for the cause of the fire,' FIUK said in a statement.

OK kinda vague but it sounds like it was plugged into the charger when it went boom.

'The only way it was possible to produce damage similar to the damage recorded within the owner's damaged device was to place the devices or component parts within a domestic microwave.'"

OK super specific. I suppose its easy enough to prove, look at non-energetic materials areas, if stuff on the exterior like buttons/case/etc shows more heat damage than the innards by the battery the heat came from the outside. Or level of damage by component material is disturbingly similar to a table of component material vs their specific microwave adsorption rate.

Time to patent microwaving your phone (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40589851)

That way, you can sue people that create bad press by microwaving phones produced by you.

Too bad that there is now prior art.

Any one else think that (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40590047)

"the other person" was this guys kid, who was aresing around with his farther's phone, doped it in the sink, or loo, and in order to try and get out of trouble tried to dry it in the microwave?

No way is this kid being honest (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40590467)

I reckon he's deliberatly microwaved it to get a refund after not recovering it from water damage. Just tried to make it seem as though the battery overheated and made it catch fire.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...