If I could find my previous post on this subject, I'd just link to it: On every subject that I know something about, Consumer Reports has over the years revealed themselves as a bottomless well of ignorance. I actually gave up on them 37 years ago, when they rated the Dodge Omni and Plymouth Horizon "unacceptable" because if you're barreling down the road at 50 mph with your hands off the wheel, then reach out, jerk it 90 degrees, and then let go, they would "oscillate and eventually run off the road".
Chrysler acknowledged the issue by changing the steering wheel and adding a damper. The Canadian government found a steering oscillation problem in the cars (same as CR) that they queried Chrysler over - wanting to know what they were going to do about it.
Is CR infallible? No and no one says they are. I have found car people to be the most vocal, hateful and irrational towards CR. Sometimes they have a point, most of the time they don't. They are just miffed that some one dared to criticize the favorite ride or make. I use CR for car reliability surveys and safety test data. I use Car & Driver, Road & Track, Car, What Car?, Motor Trend etc for the performance analysis and the fun stuff.
The thing that is nice about CR is that they are consistent with their testing. Like what they did here with the phones. The tested them all the same way. Just like they do with most everything. If product 1 passes test A,B,C & D but product 2 fails B and D then something is up. Not hard to comprehend.
Relying solely on science as one's repository of Truth is naive if not close-mindedness itself.
In the absence of a better approach, what do you suggest? Go with your gut over empirical evidence? Ask a god for divine guidance? Believe nothing?
I'll give you the last one as closest to a working program, but your portrayal of science as just another religion is misguided. The fact that we've disproven things that were once commonly believed is not grounds for firing all the scientists. In fact, it is, in itself, evidence that science works. Flawed conclusions are eventually revealed.
Skepticism is healthy, and we should always look for better and more concrete "truths," but the path to that is improved control of variables when testing theories and better observation of results. In other words, scientific method.
[QUOTE name="SolipsismX" url="/t/182536/consumer-reports-test-shows-iphone-6-plus-less-bendy-than-iphone-6-suggests-bendgate-may-be-overblown/160#post_2608746"] Can't you also do this?
switch ($phone == 'Apple') { case true: Println("Boo it's an Apple phone, shame on you") case false: println("Yay it's not an Apple phone, you haven't been brain washed yet") } [/CODE]
Swift is basically C so this should work too
[CODE] println (($phone == 'Apple') ? "Boo it's an Apple phone" : "Yaay it's not an Apple phone") [/CODE]
Apple bashing has become a blood sport for uninformed also ran people! Just unfortunate, there are basically Linux & Unix based systems! Both are good OSs, your looking at variations in hardware...I love this 6! You get what you pay for!
Looking at the numbers, the iPhone 6 showed signs of deformation (bending) at 70 pounds of force...
...The HTC One, considered by many to be a sturdy large-screened device, faired the worst with signs of deformation at 60 pounds of force,
Not true according to the published test results. Both the HTC M8 and iPhone 6 showed deformity at the same 70 lbs pressure. No idea where the author got 60 lb. I would have thought perhaps a typo but he then went on to comment about it.
Looking at the numbers, the iPhone 6 showed signs of deformation (bending) at 70 pounds of force...
...The HTC One, considered by many to be a sturdy large-screened device, faired the worst with signs of deformation at 60 pounds of force,
Not true according to the published test results. Both the HTC M8 and iPhone 6 showed deformity at the same 70 lbs pressure. No idea where the author got 60 lb. I would have thought perhaps a typo but he then went on to comment about it.
On a serious note, I'm a firm believer that the YouTube bend video that started this whole fiasco was unfair and unscientific.
That said, it's interesting to see that the Note 3 and the LG G3 did better then the iPhone 6's considering that they're made from 'cheap plastic' instead of metal, which is constantly touted as a superior material around these parts. Granted, when the 5C was released then there was a lot of back pedaling about plastic phones, but some even chose to stretch and say that Apple used better plastic then the competition. The 5C and this test really nullify the tired argument that plastic is a poor choice for smartphones. There's nothing wrong with preferring the look and feel of metal, but it's now crystal clear that this is purely a cosmetic option.
Incorrect. While metal is more vulnerable to bending, plastic is more vulnerable to cracking. And has a lower melting point, etc.. Different materials have different attributes.
What this data shows is that the iPhone 6's are worse than every other phone tested except the HTC One. And only barely.
And it confirms that the iPhone 6 is significantly weaker than the iPhone 5.
You're on an apple enthusiast site, smartguy, what are you expecting?
The testing confirms the 6, as a thinner device, can sustain less force. Whether than is an issue depends on accepted normal use cases. With a long phone like the plus, sitting on it in your back pocket may not be. Nor would placing a DVD in your back pocket and sitting on that.
Incorrect. While metal is more vulnerable to bending, plastic is more vulnerable to cracking. And has a lower melting point, etc.. Different materials have different attributes.
Try again.
Well, cracking hasn't exactly been a problem for cases. Cracked screens are the issue if we're talking about cracks. And you feel that the melting point of the case (with no regard to the parts inside) is a relevant criterion?
Well, cracking hasn't exactly been a problem for cases. Cracked screens are the issue if we're talking about cracks. And you feel that the melting point of the case (with no regard to the parts inside) is a relevant criterion?
If your phone is approaching 300 degrees F I think you might have a bigger problem to deal with.
Consumer Reports is not exactly a great source. Nobody who has a clue about cars takes their automotive recommendations seriously, for example.
That's true and back in the early 1970s, they rated the AMC Gremlin as the best subcompact car made. They later actually apologized. (I owned one and absolutely everything that could go wrong in a car went wrong in that car. Just about the only thing that never broke was the air conditioner. Even the seats broke. As well as brakes, rings, wheel bearings, the electrical systems (horn once started honking on its own), oil leaks, etc., etc. After that car, I've never purchased another American branded car again. There were only three good things about that car: storage space, the AC and it had a very large gas tank (22 gallons IIRC) for a small car.
But Consumer Reports' car repair record surveys are large enough to be very reliable. Unfortunately, that doesn't do you any good when buying a new car, especially if it's a truly new model.
But having said that, I think they do well when performing simple tests like the one they've used on these phones.
There was no "plasticgate" when Apple switched to a plastic back with the 3G and 3GS. Those cracked easily if you dropped them, or the thin plastic cracked around the 30-pin connector. Look at all the cracked screens on all phones when people drop them. Glass breaks, aluminum bends with excessive force, and plastic can crack. People need to take better care of their electronic devices. People can break anything with enough force. And apparently, 9 gay boys in skinny jeans claimed their iPhones bent in their pocket. Bunch of crap.
Comments
If I could find my previous post on this subject, I'd just link to it: On every subject that I know something about, Consumer Reports has over the years revealed themselves as a bottomless well of ignorance. I actually gave up on them 37 years ago, when they rated the Dodge Omni and Plymouth Horizon "unacceptable" because if you're barreling down the road at 50 mph with your hands off the wheel, then reach out, jerk it 90 degrees, and then let go, they would "oscillate and eventually run off the road".
Chrysler acknowledged the issue by changing the steering wheel and adding a damper. The Canadian government found a steering oscillation problem in the cars (same as CR) that they queried Chrysler over - wanting to know what they were going to do about it.
Is CR infallible? No and no one says they are. I have found car people to be the most vocal, hateful and irrational towards CR. Sometimes they have a point, most of the time they don't. They are just miffed that some one dared to criticize the favorite ride or make. I use CR for car reliability surveys and safety test data. I use Car & Driver, Road & Track, Car, What Car?, Motor Trend etc for the performance analysis and the fun stuff.
The thing that is nice about CR is that they are consistent with their testing. Like what they did here with the phones. The tested them all the same way. Just like they do with most everything. If product 1 passes test A,B,C & D but product 2 fails B and D then something is up. Not hard to comprehend.
Relying solely on science as one's repository of Truth is naive if not close-mindedness itself.
In the absence of a better approach, what do you suggest? Go with your gut over empirical evidence? Ask a god for divine guidance? Believe nothing?
I'll give you the last one as closest to a working program, but your portrayal of science as just another religion is misguided. The fact that we've disproven things that were once commonly believed is not grounds for firing all the scientists. In fact, it is, in itself, evidence that science works. Flawed conclusions are eventually revealed.
Skepticism is healthy, and we should always look for better and more concrete "truths," but the path to that is improved control of variables when testing theories and better observation of results. In other words, scientific method.
Can't you also do this?
Code:
[CODE]
[CODE]if (??. == "?") {
println("????")
} else {
println("????")
}[/CODE]
[/CODE]
[/QUOTE]
Or this.....
[CODE]
switch ($phone == 'Apple') {
case true:
Println("Boo it's an Apple phone, shame on you")
case false:
println("Yay it's not an Apple phone, you haven't been brain washed yet")
}
[/CODE]
Swift is basically C so this should work too
[CODE]
println (($phone == 'Apple') ? "Boo it's an Apple phone" : "Yaay it's not an Apple phone")
[/CODE]
Wow, I didn't know you had a Samsung Note Tallest, how do you like it, that pen huh, pretty cool.
No use trying to defend yourself, once they smell blood in the water your going to get eaten.
Now let's see some military field testing under combat conditions
They are showing that it is less bendy than the iPhone 5, of which there seem to be thousands.
Seems a bit strange none of us knew that it is unwise to put the iPhone in your pockets until now.
Not true according to the published test results. Both the HTC M8 and iPhone 6 showed deformity at the same 70 lbs pressure. No idea where the author got 60 lb. I would have thought perhaps a typo but he then went on to comment about it.
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2014/09/consumer-reports-tests-iphone-6-bendgate/index.htm
Despite the inaccuracy I doubt anyone needs to seriously worry about "bending their smartphone" if they use just the slightest amount of common sense.
Perhaps, but it's those of us who use a lot of common sense that worry about bending the iPhone 6/6 Plus. ????
Incorrect. While metal is more vulnerable to bending, plastic is more vulnerable to cracking. And has a lower melting point, etc.. Different materials have different attributes.
Try again.
You're on an apple enthusiast site, smartguy, what are you expecting?
The testing confirms the 6, as a thinner device, can sustain less force. Whether than is an issue depends on accepted normal use cases. With a long phone like the plus, sitting on it in your back pocket may not be. Nor would placing a DVD in your back pocket and sitting on that.
Perhaps, but it's those of us who use a lot of common sense that worry about bending the iPhone 6/6 Plus. ????
no, those of us with a lot of common sense just never put ANY phone in our back pocket at all, let alone sit on it.
Incorrect. While metal is more vulnerable to bending, plastic is more vulnerable to cracking. And has a lower melting point, etc.. Different materials have different attributes.
Try again.
Well, cracking hasn't exactly been a problem for cases. Cracked screens are the issue if we're talking about cracks. And you feel that the melting point of the case (with no regard to the parts inside) is a relevant criterion?
No, they can't. They need to make money too.
Consumer Reports is not exactly a great source. Nobody who has a clue about cars takes their automotive recommendations seriously, for example.
That's true and back in the early 1970s, they rated the AMC Gremlin as the best subcompact car made. They later actually apologized. (I owned one and absolutely everything that could go wrong in a car went wrong in that car. Just about the only thing that never broke was the air conditioner. Even the seats broke. As well as brakes, rings, wheel bearings, the electrical systems (horn once started honking on its own), oil leaks, etc., etc. After that car, I've never purchased another American branded car again. There were only three good things about that car: storage space, the AC and it had a very large gas tank (22 gallons IIRC) for a small car.
But Consumer Reports' car repair record surveys are large enough to be very reliable. Unfortunately, that doesn't do you any good when buying a new car, especially if it's a truly new model.
But having said that, I think they do well when performing simple tests like the one they've used on these phones.
If your phone is approaching 300 degrees F I think you might have a bigger problem to deal with.
Exactly.