Beleaguered Samsung postpones Galaxy Fold media events

“Smartphone maker Samsung Electronics Co Ltd has postponed media events for its Galaxy Fold planned for this week in Hong Kong and Shanghai, a company official said, days after reviewers of the foldable handset reported defective samples,” Reuters reports. “The official did not elaborate on reasons or rescheduling.”

“Instead of plaudits ahead of the phone’s launch on April 26 in the United States, the South Korean conglomerate has been blighted by technology journalists reporting breaks, bulges and blinking screens after using their samples for as little as a day,” Reuters reports. “The reviewers’ reports of broken screens went viral online and prompted the creation of hashtag #foldgate on Twitter.”

“The Samsung official on Monday said the firm was thoroughly investigating the damage reports as previously announced and declined to comment on whether there would be any change to the U.S. release date,” Reuters reports.

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Reality begins to set in at the South Korean dishwasher maker.

Hey, Samsung, what’s the point of being first, if you can’t be good? – April 19, 2019
Samsung Galaxy Fold display failures raise specter of Note 7 fiasco – April 18, 2019
CNBC reviews Samsung Galaxy Fold: Completely unusable after just two days of use – April 17, 2019
The Verge reviews Samsung Galaxy Fold: Screen broke after just a day – April 17, 2019
Samsung Galaxy Fold display issues emerge immediately – April 17, 2019
Ugly wrinkle for Samsung: Galaxy Fold sports a nasty crease running down the middle of the display – March 21, 2019
absolute joke – March 14, 2019
Apple’s glass supplier says it’ll be ready for real, durable foldable iPhones within ‘a couple of years’ – March 5, 2019
Apple patent application reveals foldable iPhone with self-heating display, lock-out mechanism to protect against cold weather damage – February 28, 2019
If Apple does a foldable iPhone, then folding phones will have been done right – February 28, 2019


  1. The fail rate seemed to be universal, how could they not have known? Why would you release a product with anything over 1% fails, let alone almost 100%? People use their phones, hard.

    1. Why? Because it’s an ingrained part of the Korean culture.

      Somewhere in the development cycle a lab technician, engineer, and/or low- to mid-level manager called attention to this issue. S/he was simply overruled by someone higher up the food chain, who decided to simply ignore the issue. Korean culture being what it is, the person who is more senior than the others can NOT be questioned or even asked to reconsider their position to bring a product into production.

      It was this same reason that led to producing batteries slightly too large in the Galaxy S7 and Note. It’s not a matter of Samsung being unable to recognize such issues in the design and development phase, it’s a matter of being completely rigid in their cultural standard that the senior person can do no wrong — and must be obeyed at all cost without question.

  2. It seems Samstupid’s fervent wish to get a product out with a competitive advantage overrides the basic common sense needed to create a reliable product that’s been tested & tested and certified to be solid and ready for an abusive public. Otherwise it’s reputation and trust suicide.

    1. I’m willing to give them the benefit of the doubt of doing thorough fold/unfold testing in the lab in ideal conditions. Having the test unit in the wild with assorted temperature, UV exposure, unit handling etc is a whole different ball game for those displays.

  3. I can’t see how a “plastic covering” that is so thin and can be easily removed by a user is a “solution”. At best, after 3 or 4 months, will start to peel off.

    1. That probably depends on the bonding agent for the covering. I’ve seen how they make those thick lucite panels for large aquarium windows. They don’t make that monolithic pane in one go. It is actually up to 7, 1-2in panels glued together with a bonding agent with the same index of refraction. A similar process might be in play here to keep it bonded to the ‘original’ display.

  4. “But but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but but it’s only FOUR reviewers!!!!!1111111111!1” – People who inexplicably defend Samsung for $2000 shitty hardware, but would never let Apple get away with it.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.