Samsung may be ditching one of the battery suppliers for the ill-fated Galaxy Note 7 in favor of a new one for the upcoming Galaxy S8. A new report claims Samsung is in talks with the Japanese company Murata Manufacturing for it to supply batteries for the upcoming flagship device.

See also:

How to extend your Android’s battery life

2 weeks ago

The report, from the Japan-based Nikkei business daily (via Reuters), comes just a few days after Samsung revealed the final results of its Galaxy Note 7 investigation. The smartphone was recalled after a number of units exploded soon after it went on sale in the fall of 2016. Samsung put the blame on the batteries that were used in the phone, and added that it will implement a new 8-point battery testing system for its future smartphones.

The Samsung Galaxy Note 7 had two battery suppliers. One was from the company’s own affiliate, Samsung SDI, while the other supplier was China’s Amperex Technology. The new report claims, via unnamed sources, that Murata Manufacturing would replace Amperex as the second supplier of batteries for the Galaxy S8, if the talks between Samsung and Murata are successful.

If this report is accurate, it should not be a huge shock to learn that Samsung wants to trade up on its second smartphone battery supplier. It certainly can’t ditch its own affiliate, so the second one has to go. The company simply cannot afford anything bad to happen with the Galaxy S8 launch, so dumping Amperex for a new company is in its best interest.

Samsung previously said it would not reveal the Galaxy S8 at its 2017 Mobile World Congress press event on February 26. However, recent rumors claims the company might offer a teaser video for the phone at MWC 2017, before the official reveal happens. Current rumors claim the phone will be unveiled in late March, a few weeks before it actually goes on sale in mid-April.

John Callaham
John was a newspaper reporter before becoming a technology and video/PC gaming writer in 2000. He lives in Greer, SC with his wife and five cats.
  • Ben Sin

    why don’t you guys link to the original source material (Nikkei or Reuters in this case) when writing these stories. it’s so shady, you’re legit rewriting someone else’s work but can’t even bother to link back.

    • Wjdzm

      you can find the link at the bottom of the article hur

      • I was paid 104,000 bucks in last 12 months by doing an on-line job from home a­­n­­d I manage to earn that much by wo­rking in my own time for several h /day. I’m using a money making opportunity I stumbled upon from company that i found online and I am happy that i made so much money on the side. It’s so newbie-friendly a­n­d I am just so happy that i discovered this. Here’s what I do… STATICTAB.COM/8cx4rgs

    • Joonho Jung

      If you read it till the end…… there’s a link smh

      • Ben Sin

        Oh OK it’s buried at the bottom in tiny fonts. Wonder if Android Authority would appreciate it if they break a story and other sites do the same to them (rewrite the news, then provide the link to AA at the very end in a smaller font). Blogs that rewrite news should be required to link to original article in first paragraph. Too many blogs bury link at bottom or worse misattribute links.

  • Can we move forward from talking about batteries?