They've been sending these to bug outlets; smaller guys haven't even gotten their hands on them.
> Here’s the statement in full:
> "A limited number of early Galaxy Fold samples were provided to media for review. We have received a few reports regarding the main display on the samples provided. We will thoroughly inspect these units in person to determine the cause of the matter.
> Separately, a few reviewers reported having removed the top layer of the display causing damage to the screen. The main display on the Galaxy Fold features a top protective layer, which is part of the display structure designed to protect the screen from unintended scratches. Removing the protective layer or adding adhesives to the main display may cause damage. We will ensure this information is clearly delivered to our customers."
To me this reads: Samsung says there are several categories of issues that they will investigate, but to address one particular category where a protective layer was removed, they will make sure that customers are clearly informed that they should not remove the protective layer (which I assume will include a label on the layer itself).
In other words, whereas the author sees that statement as implicitly putting the blame on the users, I see it as implicitly accepting responsibility in terms of insufficient labeling.
Edit: I assumed the submission title was the same as the article title, but it is not. The article title "Samsung responds to reviewer complaints about its Galaxy Fold phone" seems fine.
They do mention that some reviewers tried to remove the protective film over the screen but nothing in this article seems to be suggesting this is a "you're holding it wrong" reaction from Samsung.
Samsung is not blaming any of the other failures on users, and states they are going to examine the units.
Seems like a reasonable statement to me.
A subset of the reviewers experienced broken phones.
A subset of the reviewers who experienced broken phones admitted to removing a protective shield on the screen, thinking it was a temporary film meant only to preserve the screen from scratches during shipping.
Samsung was only claiming that the subset of subset of reviewers had erred. Samsung did not claim that the reviewers who experienced a broken phone but who did not remove the protective screen had erred.
>A limited number of early Galaxy Fold samples were provided to media for review. We have received a few reports regarding the main display on the samples provided. We will thoroughly inspect these units in person to determine the cause of the matter.
>Separately, a few reviewers reported having removed the top layer of the display causing damage to the screen. The main display on the Galaxy Fold features a top protective layer, which is part of the display structure designed to protect the screen from unintended scratches. Removing the protective layer or adding adhesives to the main display may cause damage. We will ensure this information is clearly delivered to our customers.
From what I've read, the reviewers mentioned the issue was a poorly designed hinge.
