Did you worry about your battery to be exploded before those accidents? I do
not think so. So that time if somebody called you on your doorstep saying
that buy a safety device for your battery would you have bought that one? I
do not think so. Why would you spend on something that you think will not
give you a value (as it offers safety for that you think is already safe
enough)? That's how a manager was thinking before that: Sony has a great
reputation, battery technology is safe, why should then spend more on
producing? After the things it is always easier to be clever...

Tamas


On 16/08/06, Bob Axtell <engineer@neomailbox.com> wrote:
>
> Alan B. Pearce wrote:
> >> Recalling 4 million batteries seems like non-cost-effective
> >> approach. How many of these buggers have blown ?
> >> Would not a warning and insurance be cheaper ?
> >>
> >
> > That is not the way the system works. There is no guarantee that the
> ones
> > still "out there" are save, they could fail at any time, through what is
> > apparently a diagnosed mechanism. No amount of insurance and warnings is
> > cheaper if it is your house/work place/car/airplane that gets cought in
> the
> > conflagration when it fails.
> >
> >
> Exactly. Now knowing that the batteries are unsafe, Dell would be
> foolhardy to do ANYTHING except what
> it is now doing.
>
> Can you spell "lawsuit" in 20 different languages?
>
> --Bob
>
> > Alan (owner of a Dell with a battery not on the list) ...
> >
> >
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>



-- 
unPIC -- The PIC Disassembler
http://unpic.sourceforge.net
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist