The Galaxy Note 7 will probably go down as the most disastrous phone launch in history. Shortly after launch, reports started rolling in that the devices were exploding, causing minor injuries to customers and burning down cars. Sales were halted, and 2.5 million devices were recalled. After a retooling period for the Note 7, "defective" devices were exchanged and sales resumed... and then reports started coming in that the devices were still exploding. A second recall has been started, and the Galaxy Note 7 has been declared dead. Samsung is even sending out ceramic-lined fireproof coffins for returns.

Everyone is starting to wonder how we got to this point, and reports are rolling in from across the Internet.

For the first recall, Samsung has admitted that its subsidiary, Samsung SDI, was to blame. Citing CSPC Chairman Elliot Kaye, Bloomberg said the "batteries made by Samsung SDI had been built slightly too large for the compartment in the phone. Installing them had crimped the corner of the batteries, causing them to short circuit and overheat," while The New York Times says that "plates inside the SDI battery were too close to each other near its rounded corners, making it vulnerable to a short circuit."

For the replacement Note 7s, Samsung switched to its other battery supplier, Amperex Technology Ltd (ATL), so why did the replacements also catch fire? The investigation is still ongoing, so no one has a definitive answer yet.

The Financial Times cites "one person who has spoken to Samsung executives" as blaming the second round of problems on "tweaks to the processor to speed up the rate at which the phone could be charged," probably referring to Samsung's fast-charging feature. Many phones are exploding when not being charged, but maybe Samsung's custom fast-charging method is weakening some part of the battery structure.

On the other hand, Bloomberg cites "a person familiar with discussions between government agencies and [Samsung]" as saying the problem lies with ATL's batteries. The report makes a good case that "The apparent new fault helps explain why Samsung would abruptly pull the plug [on the Note 7]"—if ATL's batteries were also defective, Samsung wouldn't have any viable batteries to put in the device.

The New York Times gives us a tantalizing look behind the scenes at Samsung, saying the post-recall testing process was hindered by a desire to not create a paper trail. "It did not help that the hundreds of Samsung testers trying to pinpoint the problem could not easily communicate with one another," the Times said. "Fearing lawsuits and subpoenas, Samsung told employees involved in the testing to keep communications about the tests offline—meaning no e-mails were allowed, according to the person briefed on the process."

The report also notes that, a month before launch, Samsung had "hundreds of beta testers" internally and at carrier partners like AT&T and Verizon testing the Note, and no one ever identified a battery problem. Whatever is causing the Note 7 to blow up, it's a tricky problem to diagnose. We're still waiting for the CPSC to chime in on a second recall notice, which might have some answers.