He did not "spread lies". He bent an iPhone 6 Plus with his bare hands with relative ease, and couldn't do similar with some other phones. The iPhone 6 and 6 Plus do both bend more easily than some other smartphones; this is just a fact and you not liking it isn't going to change facts into lies. Whether it's a problem - as in a real-life issue for normal people on a day-day basis - or not, that is a different matter.
No, it's not a fact. The tests on test beds in fact revealed the differences were in fact not large at all (the Iphone was mid range in how it reacted to pressure) and depended greatly on where you applied pressure. So, in real use the difference could be marginal.
also, are you going to:
Vouch about what the hell was done to the phone before he "bent it" (That makes a hell of a difference)
I wouldn't considering how much interest he had to gain with his stunt and the ridiculous way it was done.
Vouch that there were no edits.... Ahem, there were, which seemingly came from different takes.
Are you really going to tell me with a straight face that his crappy video is a professional test of the phone's durability or that it has any bearing to how pressure is applied in actual use? Really!!
Considering Apple sold 150M+ Iphone 6 after that idiot's action... Without significant changes... I'm going to trust them more than I trust him.
So, no, it's not a "fact", especially coming from that guy.
He did not "spread lies". He bent an iPhone 6 Plus with his bare hands with relative ease, and couldn't do similar with some other phones. The iPhone 6 and 6 Plus do both bend more easily than some other smartphones; this is just a fact and you not liking it isn't going to change facts into lies. Whether it's a problem - as in a real-life issue for normal people on a day-day basis - or not, that is a different matter.
Unless you were there for all the tests, and the tests of all of the smartphones were conducted with the same equipment and the same test setup, then there are no "facts" to speak of.
You don't get to vouch for the tests authenticity or accuracy based on a video, nor the honesty and sincerity of the tester. That is just your subjective opinion, not an assessment of fact.
Photo of alleged iPhone 6 with alleged break due to alleged atypical use.
It's pretty easy to see that the case on the other side of the button shows no signs of fatigue, crystallization or bending, which is because I'm pretty careful with my devices.
Again, it's not a big deal besides the fact that it will kill my resale value.
That's not fatigue; that would only happen from cyclical loading. The cross section of the material there would likely see compression from a localized single bending event (a concentrated force perpendicular to the screen directed towards the backside) and it looks like material was displaced in shear but not separated. Do you have an idea of how it might have happened? Is the face of that iPhone flat now?
I'd take it back and see if they will do a replacement. It looks to me as if it was loaded just beyond the yield for the material. Not necessarily bad design as much as a decision based on expected use and loads. It looks like Apple engineers added some material on the inside of the shell wall to beef that area up for the "S" models.
That's not fatigue; that would only happen from cyclical loading. The cross section of the material there would likely see compression from a localized single bending event (a concentrated force perpendicular to the screen directed towards the backside) and it looks like material was displaced in shear but not separated. Do you have an idea of how it might have happened? Is the face of that iPhone flat now?
I'd take it back and see if they will do a replacement. It looks to me as if it was loaded just beyond the yield for the material. Not necessarily bad design as much as a decision based on expected use and loads. It looks like Apple engineers added some material on the inside of the shell wall to beef that area up for the "S" models.
This seems to be a strong application of force in a small point that was sustained for a while (not the same as bending around a point), there must have been something quite hard directly on that point while force was applied. It could be anything, sitting on keys in the pocket, sitting on a metal bar or a rock, whatever. It has to be something hard though.
This might have happened with the 5s (which some people claimed bended too) or any other phone really. Enough force will destroy anything. Usually sitting on something that hard would bother the sitter enough that they'll move or notice right away, but if most of the force is on another part of the buttocks, I guess it would be possible to endure it while the damage is done.
He did not "spread lies". He bent an iPhone 6 Plus with his bare hands with relative ease, and couldn't do similar with some other phones. The iPhone 6 and 6 Plus do both bend more easily than some other smartphones; this is just a fact and you not liking it isn't going to change facts into lies. Whether it's a problem - as in a real-life issue for normal people on a day-day basis - or not, that is a different matter.
No, it's not a fact. The tests on test beds in fact revealed the differences were in fact not large at all (the Iphone was mid range in how it reacted to pressure) and depended greatly on where you applied pressure. So, in real use the difference could be marginal.
You need to read my post again. What I said was a fact is that the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus bend more easily than some other smartphones. You said that in more scientific tests, the iPhones were "mid range in how it reacted to pressure”, so you have in fact confirmed that my statement of fact is indeed correct and not a lie.
also, are you going to:
Vouch about what the hell was done to the phone before he "bent it" (That makes a hell of a difference)
I wouldn't considering how much interest he had to gain with his stunt and the ridiculous way it was done.
Vouch that there were no edits.... Ahem, there were, which seemingly came from different takes.
I think in the original video, there were edits and this raised doubts in some people (understandably). So he did another one where he unboxed a brand new phone and bent it immediately, with no edits. He also tried bending a variety of other phones, including Samsung devices.
An iPhone 6 Plus can be bent with bare hands. So can some other smartphones (including some Samsungs). Some other smartphones, cannot be bent with bare hands. Not surprisingly, the smartphones that cannot be easily bent are a fair bit bulkier than an iPhone 6.
Are you really going to tell me with a straight face that his crappy video is a professional test of the phone's durability or that it has any bearing to how pressure is applied in actual use? Really!!
The guy’s test was not scientific. I know this. I never claimed that it was, and neither did he. I also said:
Yes, unless the components inside are not as forgiving—such as the glass screen (maybe not with Corning’s newer glasses). Sadly logic board, Lithium polymer batteries, and camera/button assemblies are stuck with the physical limitations space age materials are not. The case is to protect the internals so I expect some scuff. And the glass (even Corning’s incredibly tough and flexible glass) is not immune to the shock of a few Gs when it hits the ground (unless Apple was super smart and put a small elastomer gasket around the glass edge between it and the case to absorb the Gs).
Apple could make the cases protect the parts (especially the glass) better, but even then dumb-farks, and the unlucky would still find ways to abuse/drop their phone where the extra few millimeters of protection wouldn’t save the screen. So, maybe Apple figured: “F-it! Let’s make a work of art, even if it means teaching everyone to be a bit more careful while using it.” Sure some people are going to complain, but would they blame a watchmaker if they dropped their watch and it broke 100 years ago? Nope, because back then people realized they were responsible for their own actions—be they by mistake or not.
Nokia had the TOUGHEST phone in the world before smartphones took off, but the trade-off was a tiny screen and relatively cheap look and feel. So, it’s a trade-off between bulk/weight and elegance. We all know where Apple choses to be in that spectrum. I would love for apple to wrap the screen at least 1 more mm past the glass edge, but silly engineers also want to be artists… at least there are options for those that can take other OSes, and good, thick, inexpensive cases abound.
…That phone is poi-son!” Sorry: couldn’t help but hear the Bell Biv Devoe in that line. (referencing their song Poison for anyone too young to remember the early 90s)
Do you have an idea of how it might have happened? Is the face of that iPhone flat now?
I have no idea how and when it happened. I have a soft(er) type plastic cover which envelopes the entire phone, less the screen, and I only remove it to clean dust and pocket lint that collects over a month or two. My phone is not bent, nor does it have a curve in it at all; it's perfectly flat.
Right because Unbox Therapy is the expert in materials science. This guy is just looking for more YouTube hits. Just this morning on Twitter he was bragging about his "bendgate" video being the 4th most viewed on Twitter last year.
When I saw the phones shifting around in the test apparatus that test lost a lot of credibility with me. It has some merit but those force measurements are probably off by a significant percentage. I don't doubt that the new shell has greater strength; I just don't believe it will be as great as his test shows.
When I saw the phones shifting around in the test apparatus that test lost a lot of credibility with me.
Why? The squirming was due to the slippery nature of the plastic blocks that contact the test piece, but there's still only one way the force can ultimately go - through the test piece to the scales.
Thank you for sharing your experience, I appreciate it.
This is exactly the kind of reply I was hoping for and I thought the way I worded my comment was clear enough so I wouldn't get snarky comments….like I was trolling.
These smart-aleck replies indicate there a number of posters who have absolutely no clue who you are, your posting history, or your support for Apple.
I have no idea how and when it happened. I have a soft(er) type plastic cover which envelopes the entire phone, less the screen, and I only remove it to clean dust and pocket lint that collects over a month or two. My phone is not bent, nor does it have a curve in it at all; it's perfectly flat.
Was it the phone that cracked or was it a separate case cover? Some third party cover, right?
I have no idea how and when it happened. I have a soft(er) type plastic cover which envelopes the entire phone, less the screen, and I only remove it to clean dust and pocket lint that collects over a month or two. My phone is not bent, nor does it have a curve in it at all; it's perfectly flat.
It would be very unusual to see that (it almost looks like a column failure, a bit of buckling) in my opinion, but maybe I'm not seeing the detail well enough. Still, I'd take it back and try for a replacement.
Why? The squirming was due to the slippery nature of the plastic blocks that contact the test piece, but there's still only one way the force can ultimately go - through the test piece to the scales.
Yes all of the force will go to the scale, but he is trying to determine how much and WHERE the force is applied to bend the phones. The phones apparently have a weak spot near the bottom volume switch and that test shifted where the force is applied when the phones slid. Torque = force x distance. The distance from the weak spot has changed. Moving the bottom support closer to the weakest spot of the phone will require less force to bend it.
You need to read my post again. What I said was a fact is that the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus bend more easily than some other smartphones. You said that in more scientific tests, the iPhones were "mid range in how it reacted to pressure”, so you have in fact confirmed that my statement of fact is indeed correct and not a lie.
I think in the original video, there were edits and this raised doubts in some people (understandably). So he did another one where he unboxed a brand new phone and bent it immediately, with no edits. He also tried bending a variety of other phones, including Samsung devices.
An iPhone 6 Plus can be bent with bare hands. So can some other smartphones (including some Samsungs). Some other smartphones, cannot be bent with bare hands. Not surprisingly, the smartphones that cannot be easily bent are a fair bit bulkier than an iPhone 6.
The guy’s test was not scientific. I know this. I never claimed that it was, and neither did he. I also said:
A fact is a fact, regardless of who it comes from.
I read your post well enough.
Your posts beyond that.
You used his bending the fracking phone on video as a proof of your argument and you made it clear you think this is somehow legit.
Its in the sentence BEFORE stating your "fact". This is an anethema to anyone who wants to bring a neutral fact based argument.
I don't want to hear this kind of "seen on youtube" BS argument ever as proof of anything!
It is anti-science, anti-journalism and even anti-logic and it has to stop.
If you had said just that it was midrange amongst phone tested (better than the S6) on the same test bed in same conditons I wouldn't even bother to reply to you. Because that argument would be plausible within its context if not a proof that the test actually reflects real use (that's a very important point).
Also, the word "some" is not neutral, it's known as a weasel word in arguments because the person saying can couch it however he wants and it is means so little, if you say it you're always right unless no phone is better (which would be difficult to prove). So, it's almost always true while at the same time being a useless piece of info, thus not a fact. "Some" based "facts" are often used by demagogues.
Some children take a beating better than others..,. (sic) (Horrible thing to even contemplate but probably true... And so what?)
Some women fake rape charges. (It does occur, but is very rare yet this statement is dragged out every time discussion about rape occur)
Some Android phones are unsecure POS. (I'm sure "some" are. That's a fact hey... (sic), doesn't say much though).
Some GOP candidates are potential criminals (That is only mildly relevant without precision)
Some immigrants get jobs or US born workers can do (no doubt... And? )
Some voters fraud occurs. (How much! Who fracking knows from this sentence, but it is "true" and used to enact voter suppression laws).
Some people will die if they eat bread with Gluten. (I'm sure its an issue for those people, but used as a way to sell non Gluten food it is despicable)
Or something even closer to your line of reasoning while bringing up the Youtube clown
Some cars will be damaged more than others in a random accident.
When using "some" :
if 1000 phones have a worst performance and two have a better one, "some" is still valid
If all phones don'T bend under typical use, well some would still be stronger than one another, though it wouldn't be salient to anything.
That's why words like "some", "may" and many others traditionally would not be used in journalism, especially in the title.
If you just wanted to say the Iphone doesn't have the strongest phone, why even use that guy in the argument when it doesn't demonstrate this at all and it is just an inflammatory button pushing remark ( thousands of posts of flame wars on Macrumors because of this), when there were other better ways to make the point.
If you just wanted to say the Iphone doesn't have the strongest phone, why even use that guy in the argument when it doesn't demonstrate this at all and it is just an inflammatory button pushing remark ( thousands of posts of flame wars on Macrumors because of this), when there were other better ways to make the point.
You are desperately confused about the point I am trying to make. You don’t need to argue with me about whether this guy’s tests were scientific or not. The point I was countering was whether he “spread lies”. Buying a brand new phone and then bending it with his bare hands, live on video, is not “lying” or “spreading lies”.
I just watched the original video again and he does say “in the name of science” quite often, so I understand people being a bit annoyed that the test wasn’t better controlled. But, the claim was never that the test was scientific (as in well controlled). He also makes absolutely no comparative statements in terms of the iPhone 6 durability/bendability vs other phones. So seriously, where exactly are the “lies” in his video?
These smart-aleck replies indicate there a number of posters who have absolutely no clue who you are, your posting history, or your support for Apple.
Thank you. I was getting a little miffed because I was being attacked for what was ignorantly viewed as trolling and attacking Apple. All I wanted to know is if anyone else had a similar incident with their phone and what Apple's stance might be if I brought it to a store. Sometimes it's hit or miss, depending on the Genius who helps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
Was it the phone that cracked or was it a separate case cover? Some third party cover, right?
Refer to my post #44 where I posted a pic. I use a third party cover, not the same brand or model I've used on past phones but it's the exact same style, material and coverage. It provides no additional strength but the hard rubber bounces well and has saved the screens on past iPhones from cracking after dropping them 4-5 times. I've yet to drop this one, though, after 8 months (knock wood).
As I mentioned in a previous post, I remove the cover every now and then to clean the dust and lint off because with my iPhone 5, bits of sand made their way between the phone case and the cover and scratched the heck out of it.
This phone has no bends or twists and is perfectly flat. I keep good care of my phones because I either sell to Gizelle at upgrade time or pass them down to my teens.
The whole reason for my post was to gauge my chances of Apple replacing my phone because of the break in the case right at the lower volume button. What I don't want to happen is for the screen to work its way loose because the case no longer provides continuous "trapping" of the screen to the case.
Thank you, again, for being a voice of reason…..both you and the other 2 or 3 members with open minds and better than average reading comprehension who answered me in a constructive manner.
The whole reason for my post was to gauge my chances of Apple replacing my phone because of the break in the case right at the lower volume button.
I think it’s just going to be “luck of the draw” on the temperament of the genius who serves you. I guess if the first visit is unsuccessful, you can just keep on making genius appointments at different stores until you get the answer you want.
It’s a very strange failure that you have there. Perhaps a manufacturing defect where the case at that point was milled a bit too deep so the aluminium wall was extremely thin?
You are desperately confused about the point I am trying to make. You don’t need to argue with me about whether this guy’s tests were scientific or not. The point I was countering was whether he “spread lies”. Buying a brand new phone and then bending it with his bare hands, live on video, is not “lying” or “spreading lies”.
I just watched the original video again and he does say “in the name of science” quite often, so I understand people being a bit annoyed that the test wasn’t better controlled. But, the claim was never that the test was scientific (as in well controlled). He also makes absolutely no comparative statements in terms of the iPhone 6 durability/bendability vs other phones. So seriously, where exactly are the “lies” in his video?
You didn't read anything in my post, shifted away from your "fact" (sic), and then gratuitously claimed I'm "confused"; just fantastic!
Usually I'd call moderation but hey, you're a moderator! I can't even ignore you, which I would usually do; just fantastic.
Your "fact" is that "some" (whatever that means here) phones are easier to bend than others when his actions don't prove that unless he has:
- Precisely calibrated robot hands (and you know what force Cyberman applied)
- Knows the weakest points of every phone before even touching them and bends them there all in the exact same way (and you know that he was precise just by looking at it on your screen)
- Know that the probability of those pressure points, which vary in position phone to phone, occuring in real life.
Even with Roboclown, you'd only know the breaking point at this precise point he tried that may or may not correspond to any real world use. So, basically useless information to proving that any phone actually routinely bends in real life. Because of course, that's what our heroclown wants...
Yet, you used this video to make a point about "some" (sic) phones... I'm pretty sure I know how arguments are usually presented and it's the previous sentence to your "fact".
Your spiel about knowing it is unscientific (and him knowing... So what the point does he have! Money making?) means nothing if you use this to make a point, or tell us to "accept it", or call people "confused"!! The fact that thousands of people all over the net (and in real life), have used this very video to trash Apple, undermines its supposedly benign nature.
I've already made a extensive comment about the abuse of the word "some" in arguments and couching its use as demonstrating facts, so I'm not going into that again.
Anyway, I'm going to try to ignore your stuff from now on and I recommend you ignore mine. Because I'm never again replying to anything you say. This is signed.... Befuddled at Appleinsider (sic).
You didn't read anything in my post, shifted away from your "fact" (sic), and then gratuitously claimed I'm "confused"; just fantastic!
Usually I'd call moderation but hey, you're a moderator! I can't even ignore you, which I would usually do; just fantastic.
Your "fact" is that "some" (whatever that means here) phones are easier to bend than others when his actions don't prove that unless he has:
- Precisely calibrated robot hands (and you know what force Cyberman applied)
- Knows the weakest points of every phone before even touching them and bends them there all in the exact same way (and you know that he was precise just by looking at it on your screen)
- Know that the probability of those pressure points, which vary in position phone to phone, occuring in real life.
Even with Roboclown, you'd only know the breaking point at this precise point he tried that may or may not correspond to any real world use. So, basically useless information to proving that any phone actually routinely bends in real life. Because of course, that's what our heroclown wants...
Yet, you used this video to make a point about "some" (sic) phones... I'm pretty sure I know how arguments are usually presented and it's the previous sentence to your "fact".
Your spiel about knowing it is unscientific (and him knowing... So what the point does he have! Money making?) means nothing if you use this to make a point, or tell us to "accept it", or call people "confused"!! The fact that thousands of people all over the net (and in real life), have used this very video to trash Apple, undermines its supposedly benign nature.
I've already made a extensive comment about the abuse of the word "some" in arguments and couching its use as demonstrating facts, so I'm not going into that again.
Anyway, I'm going to try to ignore your stuff from now on and I recommend you ignore mine. Because I'm never again replying to anything you say. This is signed.... Befuddled at Appleinsider (sic).
While "Roboclown's" testing method may not have been scientific, I felt the method was used fairly between the phones he "tested". Did he sensationalize for the sake of clicks? Absolutely. Do I think he perpetrated lies in his video? No.
Have a look at the videos in the following links and tell us whether "Roboclown's" unscientific test method produced the same results as Consumer Reports scientific method.
Comments
He did not "spread lies". He bent an iPhone 6 Plus with his bare hands with relative ease, and couldn't do similar with some other phones. The iPhone 6 and 6 Plus do both bend more easily than some other smartphones; this is just a fact and you not liking it isn't going to change facts into lies. Whether it's a problem - as in a real-life issue for normal people on a day-day basis - or not, that is a different matter.
No, it's not a fact. The tests on test beds in fact revealed the differences were in fact not large at all (the Iphone was mid range in how it reacted to pressure) and depended greatly on where you applied pressure. So, in real use the difference could be marginal.
also, are you going to:
Vouch about what the hell was done to the phone before he "bent it" (That makes a hell of a difference)
I wouldn't considering how much interest he had to gain with his stunt and the ridiculous way it was done.
Vouch that there were no edits.... Ahem, there were, which seemingly came from different takes.
Are you really going to tell me with a straight face that his crappy video is a professional test of the phone's durability or that it has any bearing to how pressure is applied in actual use? Really!!
Considering Apple sold 150M+ Iphone 6 after that idiot's action... Without significant changes... I'm going to trust them more than I trust him.
So, no, it's not a "fact", especially coming from that guy.
He did not "spread lies". He bent an iPhone 6 Plus with his bare hands with relative ease, and couldn't do similar with some other phones. The iPhone 6 and 6 Plus do both bend more easily than some other smartphones; this is just a fact and you not liking it isn't going to change facts into lies. Whether it's a problem - as in a real-life issue for normal people on a day-day basis - or not, that is a different matter.
Unless you were there for all the tests, and the tests of all of the smartphones were conducted with the same equipment and the same test setup, then there are no "facts" to speak of.
You don't get to vouch for the tests authenticity or accuracy based on a video, nor the honesty and sincerity of the tester. That is just your subjective opinion, not an assessment of fact.
Exhibit A:
Photo of alleged iPhone 6 with alleged break due to alleged atypical use.
It's pretty easy to see that the case on the other side of the button shows no signs of fatigue, crystallization or bending, which is because I'm pretty careful with my devices.
Again, it's not a big deal besides the fact that it will kill my resale value.
That's not fatigue; that would only happen from cyclical loading. The cross section of the material there would likely see compression from a localized single bending event (a concentrated force perpendicular to the screen directed towards the backside) and it looks like material was displaced in shear but not separated. Do you have an idea of how it might have happened? Is the face of that iPhone flat now?
I'd take it back and see if they will do a replacement. It looks to me as if it was loaded just beyond the yield for the material. Not necessarily bad design as much as a decision based on expected use and loads. It looks like Apple engineers added some material on the inside of the shell wall to beef that area up for the "S" models.
That's not fatigue; that would only happen from cyclical loading. The cross section of the material there would likely see compression from a localized single bending event (a concentrated force perpendicular to the screen directed towards the backside) and it looks like material was displaced in shear but not separated. Do you have an idea of how it might have happened? Is the face of that iPhone flat now?
I'd take it back and see if they will do a replacement. It looks to me as if it was loaded just beyond the yield for the material. Not necessarily bad design as much as a decision based on expected use and loads. It looks like Apple engineers added some material on the inside of the shell wall to beef that area up for the "S" models.
This seems to be a strong application of force in a small point that was sustained for a while (not the same as bending around a point), there must have been something quite hard directly on that point while force was applied. It could be anything, sitting on keys in the pocket, sitting on a metal bar or a rock, whatever. It has to be something hard though.
This might have happened with the 5s (which some people claimed bended too) or any other phone really. Enough force will destroy anything. Usually sitting on something that hard would bother the sitter enough that they'll move or notice right away, but if most of the force is on another part of the buttocks, I guess it would be possible to endure it while the damage is done.
You need to read my post again. What I said was a fact is that the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus bend more easily than some other smartphones. You said that in more scientific tests, the iPhones were "mid range in how it reacted to pressure”, so you have in fact confirmed that my statement of fact is indeed correct and not a lie.
I think in the original video, there were edits and this raised doubts in some people (understandably). So he did another one where he unboxed a brand new phone and bent it immediately, with no edits. He also tried bending a variety of other phones, including Samsung devices.
An iPhone 6 Plus can be bent with bare hands. So can some other smartphones (including some Samsungs). Some other smartphones, cannot be bent with bare hands. Not surprisingly, the smartphones that cannot be easily bent are a fair bit bulkier than an iPhone 6.
The guy’s test was not scientific. I know this. I never claimed that it was, and neither did he. I also said:
A fact is a fact, regardless of who it comes from.
@ralphmouth
Yes, unless the components inside are not as forgiving—such as the glass screen (maybe not with Corning’s newer glasses). Sadly logic board, Lithium polymer batteries, and camera/button assemblies are stuck with the physical limitations space age materials are not. The case is to protect the internals so I expect some scuff. And the glass (even Corning’s incredibly tough and flexible glass) is not immune to the shock of a few Gs when it hits the ground (unless Apple was super smart and put a small elastomer gasket around the glass edge between it and the case to absorb the Gs).
Apple could make the cases protect the parts (especially the glass) better, but even then dumb-farks, and the unlucky would still find ways to abuse/drop their phone where the extra few millimeters of protection wouldn’t save the screen. So, maybe Apple figured: “F-it! Let’s make a work of art, even if it means teaching everyone to be a bit more careful while using it.” Sure some people are going to complain, but would they blame a watchmaker if they dropped their watch and it broke 100 years ago? Nope, because back then people realized they were responsible for their own actions—be they by mistake or not.
Nokia had the TOUGHEST phone in the world before smartphones took off, but the trade-off was a tiny screen and relatively cheap look and feel. So, it’s a trade-off between bulk/weight and elegance. We all know where Apple choses to be in that spectrum. I would love for apple to wrap the screen at least 1 more mm past the glass edge, but silly engineers also want to be artists… at least there are options for those that can take other OSes, and good, thick, inexpensive cases abound.
@schlack
“bend it, drop it, dunk it, bounce it, and …”
…That phone is poi-son!” Sorry: couldn’t help but hear the Bell Biv Devoe in that line. (referencing their song Poison for anyone too young to remember the early 90s)
Do you have an idea of how it might have happened? Is the face of that iPhone flat now?
I have no idea how and when it happened. I have a soft(er) type plastic cover which envelopes the entire phone, less the screen, and I only remove it to clean dust and pocket lint that collects over a month or two. My phone is not bent, nor does it have a curve in it at all; it's perfectly flat.
Right because Unbox Therapy is the expert in materials science. This guy is just looking for more YouTube hits. Just this morning on Twitter he was bragging about his "bendgate" video being the 4th most viewed on Twitter last year.
When I saw the phones shifting around in the test apparatus that test lost a lot of credibility with me. It has some merit but those force measurements are probably off by a significant percentage. I don't doubt that the new shell has greater strength; I just don't believe it will be as great as his test shows.
Why? The squirming was due to the slippery nature of the plastic blocks that contact the test piece, but there's still only one way the force can ultimately go - through the test piece to the scales.
These smart-aleck replies indicate there a number of posters who have absolutely no clue who you are, your posting history, or your support for Apple.
Was it the phone that cracked or was it a separate case cover? Some third party cover, right?
I have no idea how and when it happened. I have a soft(er) type plastic cover which envelopes the entire phone, less the screen, and I only remove it to clean dust and pocket lint that collects over a month or two. My phone is not bent, nor does it have a curve in it at all; it's perfectly flat.
It would be very unusual to see that (it almost looks like a column failure, a bit of buckling) in my opinion, but maybe I'm not seeing the detail well enough. Still, I'd take it back and try for a replacement.
Why? The squirming was due to the slippery nature of the plastic blocks that contact the test piece, but there's still only one way the force can ultimately go - through the test piece to the scales.
Yes all of the force will go to the scale, but he is trying to determine how much and WHERE the force is applied to bend the phones. The phones apparently have a weak spot near the bottom volume switch and that test shifted where the force is applied when the phones slid. Torque = force x distance. The distance from the weak spot has changed. Moving the bottom support closer to the weakest spot of the phone will require less force to bend it.
You need to read my post again. What I said was a fact is that the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus bend more easily than some other smartphones. You said that in more scientific tests, the iPhones were "mid range in how it reacted to pressure”, so you have in fact confirmed that my statement of fact is indeed correct and not a lie.
I think in the original video, there were edits and this raised doubts in some people (understandably). So he did another one where he unboxed a brand new phone and bent it immediately, with no edits. He also tried bending a variety of other phones, including Samsung devices.
An iPhone 6 Plus can be bent with bare hands. So can some other smartphones (including some Samsungs). Some other smartphones, cannot be bent with bare hands. Not surprisingly, the smartphones that cannot be easily bent are a fair bit bulkier than an iPhone 6.
The guy’s test was not scientific. I know this. I never claimed that it was, and neither did he. I also said:
A fact is a fact, regardless of who it comes from.
I read your post well enough.
Your posts beyond that.
You used his bending the fracking phone on video as a proof of your argument and you made it clear you think this is somehow legit.
Its in the sentence BEFORE stating your "fact". This is an anethema to anyone who wants to bring a neutral fact based argument.
I don't want to hear this kind of "seen on youtube" BS argument ever as proof of anything!
It is anti-science, anti-journalism and even anti-logic and it has to stop.
If you had said just that it was midrange amongst phone tested (better than the S6) on the same test bed in same conditons I wouldn't even bother to reply to you. Because that argument would be plausible within its context if not a proof that the test actually reflects real use (that's a very important point).
Also, the word "some" is not neutral, it's known as a weasel word in arguments because the person saying can couch it however he wants and it is means so little, if you say it you're always right unless no phone is better (which would be difficult to prove). So, it's almost always true while at the same time being a useless piece of info, thus not a fact. "Some" based "facts" are often used by demagogues.
Some children take a beating better than others..,. (sic) (Horrible thing to even contemplate but probably true... And so what?)
Some women fake rape charges. (It does occur, but is very rare yet this statement is dragged out every time discussion about rape occur)
Some Android phones are unsecure POS. (I'm sure "some" are. That's a fact hey... (sic), doesn't say much though).
Some GOP candidates are potential criminals (That is only mildly relevant without precision)
Some immigrants get jobs or US born workers can do (no doubt... And? )
Some voters fraud occurs. (How much! Who fracking knows from this sentence, but it is "true" and used to enact voter suppression laws).
Some people will die if they eat bread with Gluten. (I'm sure its an issue for those people, but used as a way to sell non Gluten food it is despicable)
Or something even closer to your line of reasoning while bringing up the Youtube clown
Some cars will be damaged more than others in a random accident.
When using "some" :
if 1000 phones have a worst performance and two have a better one, "some" is still valid
If all phones don'T bend under typical use, well some would still be stronger than one another, though it wouldn't be salient to anything.
That's why words like "some", "may" and many others traditionally would not be used in journalism, especially in the title.
If you just wanted to say the Iphone doesn't have the strongest phone, why even use that guy in the argument when it doesn't demonstrate this at all and it is just an inflammatory button pushing remark ( thousands of posts of flame wars on Macrumors because of this), when there were other better ways to make the point.
You are desperately confused about the point I am trying to make. You don’t need to argue with me about whether this guy’s tests were scientific or not. The point I was countering was whether he “spread lies”. Buying a brand new phone and then bending it with his bare hands, live on video, is not “lying” or “spreading lies”.
I just watched the original video again and he does say “in the name of science” quite often, so I understand people being a bit annoyed that the test wasn’t better controlled. But, the claim was never that the test was scientific (as in well controlled). He also makes absolutely no comparative statements in terms of the iPhone 6 durability/bendability vs other phones. So seriously, where exactly are the “lies” in his video?
These smart-aleck replies indicate there a number of posters who have absolutely no clue who you are, your posting history, or your support for Apple.
Thank you. I was getting a little miffed because I was being attacked for what was ignorantly viewed as trolling and attacking Apple. All I wanted to know is if anyone else had a similar incident with their phone and what Apple's stance might be if I brought it to a store. Sometimes it's hit or miss, depending on the Genius who helps.
Was it the phone that cracked or was it a separate case cover? Some third party cover, right?
Refer to my post #44 where I posted a pic. I use a third party cover, not the same brand or model I've used on past phones but it's the exact same style, material and coverage. It provides no additional strength but the hard rubber bounces well and has saved the screens on past iPhones from cracking after dropping them 4-5 times. I've yet to drop this one, though, after 8 months (knock wood).
As I mentioned in a previous post, I remove the cover every now and then to clean the dust and lint off because with my iPhone 5, bits of sand made their way between the phone case and the cover and scratched the heck out of it.
This phone has no bends or twists and is perfectly flat. I keep good care of my phones because I either sell to Gizelle at upgrade time or pass them down to my teens.
The whole reason for my post was to gauge my chances of Apple replacing my phone because of the break in the case right at the lower volume button. What I don't want to happen is for the screen to work its way loose because the case no longer provides continuous "trapping" of the screen to the case.
Thank you, again, for being a voice of reason…..both you and the other 2 or 3 members with open minds and better than average reading comprehension who answered me in a constructive manner.
I think it’s just going to be “luck of the draw” on the temperament of the genius who serves you. I guess if the first visit is unsuccessful, you can just keep on making genius appointments at different stores until you get the answer you want.
It’s a very strange failure that you have there. Perhaps a manufacturing defect where the case at that point was milled a bit too deep so the aluminium wall was extremely thin?
You are desperately confused about the point I am trying to make. You don’t need to argue with me about whether this guy’s tests were scientific or not. The point I was countering was whether he “spread lies”. Buying a brand new phone and then bending it with his bare hands, live on video, is not “lying” or “spreading lies”.
I just watched the original video again and he does say “in the name of science” quite often, so I understand people being a bit annoyed that the test wasn’t better controlled. But, the claim was never that the test was scientific (as in well controlled). He also makes absolutely no comparative statements in terms of the iPhone 6 durability/bendability vs other phones. So seriously, where exactly are the “lies” in his video?
You didn't read anything in my post, shifted away from your "fact" (sic), and then gratuitously claimed I'm "confused"; just fantastic!
Usually I'd call moderation but hey, you're a moderator! I can't even ignore you, which I would usually do; just fantastic.
Your "fact" is that "some" (whatever that means here) phones are easier to bend than others when his actions don't prove that unless he has:
- Precisely calibrated robot hands (and you know what force Cyberman applied)
- Knows the weakest points of every phone before even touching them and bends them there all in the exact same way (and you know that he was precise just by looking at it on your screen)
- Know that the probability of those pressure points, which vary in position phone to phone, occuring in real life.
Even with Roboclown, you'd only know the breaking point at this precise point he tried that may or may not correspond to any real world use. So, basically useless information to proving that any phone actually routinely bends in real life. Because of course, that's what our heroclown wants...
Yet, you used this video to make a point about "some" (sic) phones... I'm pretty sure I know how arguments are usually presented and it's the previous sentence to your "fact".
Your spiel about knowing it is unscientific (and him knowing... So what the point does he have! Money making?) means nothing if you use this to make a point, or tell us to "accept it", or call people "confused"!! The fact that thousands of people all over the net (and in real life), have used this very video to trash Apple, undermines its supposedly benign nature.
I've already made a extensive comment about the abuse of the word "some" in arguments and couching its use as demonstrating facts, so I'm not going into that again.
Anyway, I'm going to try to ignore your stuff from now on and I recommend you ignore mine. Because I'm never again replying to anything you say. This is signed.... Befuddled at Appleinsider (sic).
You didn't read anything in my post, shifted away from your "fact" (sic), and then gratuitously claimed I'm "confused"; just fantastic!
Usually I'd call moderation but hey, you're a moderator! I can't even ignore you, which I would usually do; just fantastic.
Your "fact" is that "some" (whatever that means here) phones are easier to bend than others when his actions don't prove that unless he has:
- Precisely calibrated robot hands (and you know what force Cyberman applied)
- Knows the weakest points of every phone before even touching them and bends them there all in the exact same way (and you know that he was precise just by looking at it on your screen)
- Know that the probability of those pressure points, which vary in position phone to phone, occuring in real life.
Even with Roboclown, you'd only know the breaking point at this precise point he tried that may or may not correspond to any real world use. So, basically useless information to proving that any phone actually routinely bends in real life. Because of course, that's what our heroclown wants...
Yet, you used this video to make a point about "some" (sic) phones... I'm pretty sure I know how arguments are usually presented and it's the previous sentence to your "fact".
Your spiel about knowing it is unscientific (and him knowing... So what the point does he have! Money making?) means nothing if you use this to make a point, or tell us to "accept it", or call people "confused"!! The fact that thousands of people all over the net (and in real life), have used this very video to trash Apple, undermines its supposedly benign nature.
I've already made a extensive comment about the abuse of the word "some" in arguments and couching its use as demonstrating facts, so I'm not going into that again.
Anyway, I'm going to try to ignore your stuff from now on and I recommend you ignore mine. Because I'm never again replying to anything you say. This is signed.... Befuddled at Appleinsider (sic).
While "Roboclown's" testing method may not have been scientific, I felt the method was used fairly between the phones he "tested". Did he sensationalize for the sake of clicks? Absolutely. Do I think he perpetrated lies in his video? No.
Have a look at the videos in the following links and tell us whether "Roboclown's" unscientific test method produced the same results as Consumer Reports scientific method.
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2014/09/consumer-reports-tests-iphone-6-bendgate/index.htm
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2014/10/consumer-reports-smart-phone-bendability-test/index.htm
I look forward to your reply
Wanted to include you so you could read foggyhill's reply.