I haven't seen anyone comment on this, so I'll give it a shot.
This Apple Insider article is reporting on a article from Consumer Reports. Consumer Reports released an article where they said two Galaxy S7 Active phones failed waterproof tests, and they said Galaxy S7 and S7 Edge were also tested but those passed. The Cnet article reported on some other company that tested S7 and S7 Edge and they failed. They didn't test S7 Active.
So this Apple Insider article mentioned S7 Active's failed test, but didn't mention the S7 and S7 Edge passed tests from Consumer Reports. Kind of convenient that they left that out while also pointing to the failed tests at Cnet.
It's mixed results. Yet everyone's saying that there's a scandal and S7 is horse crap and they're lying. But again, S7 and S7 Edge passed the tests by Consumer Reports, soooooo you can't really conclude Galaxy S7 sucks and they're lying and etc etc. The models that passed here actually failed there, and the one that failed here wasn't tested over there. Mixed results.
I love Apple by the way, iPhones MacBooks and Apple TV since 2009, and have never owned an android device and I actually have a negative opinion on them; before anyone starts saying I'm some android fan. Just being pragmatic.
What's your point, it is about the credibility of Samsung as a company, not just this phone.. It is a big scandal and people and Androidcentral and Phonearea (Android sites) are kicking Samsung's ass about this.
Your not pragmatic at all BTW.
Apple never claimed their phone were indestructible yet Android morons went beserk about it for weeks when morons specifically did things that were above spec.
The S7 active is plain a total absolute abject fraud. The Chance of picking two phones at random that are supposed to be water resistant and fail the first time they are used as such, is probably more than one several million (because Samsung would normally have built enough margins so it would not fail even if it went slightly above its stated spec).
BTW, Samsung is not even honoring the warantee for water damage on those phone and people are rightfully mad about that.
What's your point, it is about the credibility of Samsung as a company, not just this phone.. It is a big scandal and people and Androidcentral and Phonearea (Android sites) are kicking Samsung's ass about this.
Your not pragmatic at all BTW.
Apple never claimed their phone were indestructible yet Android morons went beserk about it for weeks when morons specifically did things that were above spec.
The S7 active is plain a total absolute abject fraud. The Chance of picking two phones at random that are supposed to be water resistant and fail the first time they are used as such, is probably more than one several million (because Samsung would normally have built enough margins so it would not fail even if it went slightly above its stated spec).
BTW, Samsung is not even honoring the warantee for water damage on those phone and people are rightfully mad about that.
Right. So you're rightfully concentrating on the S7 Active.
This is my point: I'm shedding perspective on people's comments about S7 and S7 Edge being frauds, even though this article emphasized S7 Active. Like I said, S7 and S7 Edge passed the waterproof test at Consumer Reports, yet failed the tests in Cnet's article. So what's with the conflicting reports? If you're pragmatic, you don't take that data set and conclude "it's total fraud." You say that it's inconclusive and warrants conclusive testing. They passed here, but failed over there, hmmm that's weird. Yet it seems people are saying "total fraud" for S7 and S7 Edge from the content in this article alone.
Ok, I get that. It's not good for Samsung's credibility regarding the S7 Active. Agreed, the chances of both those S7 Active phones failing is virtually zero. Which would indicate something majorly wrong or deceptive. And if it's true that a large amount of users are claiming water damage and being denied their warranty, then that's amazingly disappointing to hear. That would be ridiculous and stupid of Samsung. I wonder when that would make it to main-stream news, because it sounds like a giant scandal. The largely advertised waterproof (and champagne proof) phones are not actually as waterproof as we're told? Not good.
And again, I'm being pragmatic because I'm not using a whole bunch of ad hominem about Android users.
What's your point, it is about the credibility of Samsung as a company, not just this phone.. It is a big scandal and people and Androidcentral and Phonearea (Android sites) are kicking Samsung's ass about this.
Your not pragmatic at all BTW.
Apple never claimed their phone were indestructible yet Android morons went beserk about it for weeks when morons specifically did things that were above spec.
The S7 active is plain a total absolute abject fraud. The Chance of picking two phones at random that are supposed to be water resistant and fail the first time they are used as such, is probably more than one several million (because Samsung would normally have built enough margins so it would not fail even if it went slightly above its stated spec).
BTW, Samsung is not even honoring the warantee for water damage on those phone and people are rightfully mad about that.
Right. So you're rightfully concentrating on the S7 Active.
This is my point: I'm shedding perspective on people's comments about S7 and S7 Edge being frauds, even though this article emphasized S7 Active. Like I said, S7 and S7 Edge passed the waterproof test at Consumer Reports, yet failed the tests in Cnet's article. So what's with the conflicting reports? If you're pragmatic, you don't take that data set and conclude "it's total fraud." You say that it's inconclusive and warrants conclusive testing. They passed here, but failed over there, hmmm that's weird. Yet it seems people are saying "total fraud" for S7 and S7 Edge from the content in this article alone.
Ok, I get that. It's not good for Samsung's credibility regarding the S7 Active. Agreed, the chances of both those S7 Active phones failing is virtually zero. Which would indicate something majorly wrong or deceptive. And if it's true that a large amount of users are claiming water damage and being denied their warranty, then that's amazingly disappointing to hear. That would be ridiculous and stupid of Samsung. I wonder when that would make it to main-stream news, because it sounds like a giant scandal. The largely advertised waterproof (and champagne proof) phones are not actually as waterproof as we're told? Not good.
And again, I'm being pragmatic because I'm not using a whole bunch of ad hominem about Android users.
I said Android morons, did I call every Android users morons?. I don't think so. Anyone thinking a youtube "test" proves anything and they goes an outrage rampage deserves this epitet (and many others).
Android is ridiculously insecure and a resource hog, but it serves its purpose. Many people cannot afford Apple phones and thus they get what they can. I respect that and Android does fill this niche well. I run many versions of Android in VMWARE virtual machines.
Most of the "morons" I speak of weren't even on Android sites, they many or may not be Android users (just purport to be). Macrumors had a whole legion of those trolls (most never to be seen again after it died down, which makes me think that this was some kind of 4chan "project"...).
As for this being a "scandal", it seems it is only a scandal if Apple does it; even if it is not in fact a scandal.
BTW, Samsung has been caught faking benchmarks and astroturfing and nobody seemingly heard of it. Seemingly no one cares what Samsung does... That's good AND bad. The fact they flood the market with a continuous stream of phones helps them.
At the same time, the Apple Watch was not advertised as water resistant and it has a fantastic water resistance, well beyond the one of the S7 of any stripes. Some people have been swimming with them a whole year!
Comments
What's your point, it is about the credibility of Samsung as a company, not just this phone..
It is a big scandal and people and Androidcentral and Phonearea (Android sites) are kicking Samsung's ass about this.
Your not pragmatic at all BTW.
Apple never claimed their phone were indestructible yet Android morons went beserk about it for weeks when morons specifically did things that were above spec.
The S7 active is plain a total absolute abject fraud.
The Chance of picking two phones at random that are supposed to be water resistant and fail the first time they are used as such,
is probably more than one several million
(because Samsung would normally have built enough margins so it would not fail even if it went slightly above its stated spec).
BTW, Samsung is not even honoring the warantee for water damage on those phone and people are rightfully mad about that.
This is my point: I'm shedding perspective on people's comments about S7 and S7 Edge being frauds, even though this article emphasized S7 Active.
Like I said, S7 and S7 Edge passed the waterproof test at Consumer Reports, yet failed the tests in Cnet's article. So what's with the conflicting reports? If you're pragmatic, you don't take that data set and conclude "it's total fraud." You say that it's inconclusive and warrants conclusive testing. They passed here, but failed over there, hmmm that's weird. Yet it seems people are saying "total fraud" for S7 and S7 Edge from the content in this article alone.
Ok, I get that. It's not good for Samsung's credibility regarding the S7 Active. Agreed, the chances of both those S7 Active phones failing is virtually zero. Which would indicate something majorly wrong or deceptive. And if it's true that a large amount of users are claiming water damage and being denied their warranty, then that's amazingly disappointing to hear. That would be ridiculous and stupid of Samsung. I wonder when that would make it to main-stream news, because it sounds like a giant scandal. The largely advertised waterproof (and champagne proof) phones are not actually as waterproof as we're told? Not good.
And again, I'm being pragmatic because I'm not using a whole bunch of ad hominem about Android users.
Anyone thinking a youtube "test" proves anything and they goes an outrage rampage deserves this epitet (and many others).
Android is ridiculously insecure and a resource hog, but it serves its purpose.
Many people cannot afford Apple phones and thus they get what they can. I respect that and Android does fill this niche well.
I run many versions of Android in VMWARE virtual machines.
Most of the "morons" I speak of weren't even on Android sites, they many or may not be Android users (just purport to be).
Macrumors had a whole legion of those trolls (most never to be seen again after it died down, which makes me think that this was some kind of 4chan "project"...).
As for this being a "scandal", it seems it is only a scandal if Apple does it; even if it is not in fact a scandal.
BTW, Samsung has been caught faking benchmarks and astroturfing and nobody seemingly heard of it.
Seemingly no one cares what Samsung does... That's good AND bad.
The fact they flood the market with a continuous stream of phones helps them.
At the same time, the Apple Watch was not advertised as water resistant and it has a fantastic water resistance, well beyond the one of the S7 of any stripes.
Some people have been swimming with them a whole year!