i got into an argument at work one day, went into my office and chucked my iphone 5 at the wall out of anger. the phone hit the wall with its side. now there is a dent in my wall that's about an inch deep.
the phone still works, no cracks, just a scratch on the back. that probably happened when the phone hit my desk on the way down after hitting the wall.
And my iPhone 4S slipped out of my coat pocket and fell about 3 feet onto concrete. Both the front and back glass were cracked. I'm sure if you look you can find someone that ran over their iPhone with a car and didn't have a scratch. I'm also sure you can find someone else who dropped theirs three inches and ended up with a cracked screen.
Personal anecdotes don't say anything about the real durability of a phone.
While I can agree with you on that last line, I used my "personal anecdote" to refute andrewb123 when he suggested
Quote:
Almost everyone I know with a 4/4s/5 has smashed the glass on their phone and needed a replacement.
That anecdote was ok for you though, right, or was what I talked about not allowed? This last year, specifically, I have been doing a lot of renos in and outside my house and have dropped it quite a few time (all without a case) and I'm just saying I have had nothing but the odd scratch/scuff on the corner. But, hey, thanks for saying my personal opinion doesn't matter, neither does calling out someone who is obviously exaggerating.
That is scientifically not true. Weight has no bearing on the rate at which an object falls. One could argue that outside of a vacuum if two objects weighed the same on one was substantially larger that wind resistance could play a small factor into rate of acceleration; however, weight in and of itself has absolutely no influence on how fast an object falls.
Actually, the statement is true.
IN A VACUUM, items of different weights fall at the same speed. In the atmosphere (where most people will be using their phones), you have to factor in air resistance. If two items are exactly the same size but have different weights, the heavier one will fall faster. OTOH, if they are different sizes but the same weight, the smaller one will fall faster.
The S4 is both larger and heavier. The two factors will counter each other to some extent, so it's impossible to say if it will fall faster or slower without doing the math (which also requires knowledge of the orientation when it falls). So the original statement was incorrect (because it didn't factor in size), but your statement that weight doesn't affect falling speeds is also wrong.
Probably because that's easier to understand. It might have been stated more precisely by writing that 'all phones from company X, Y and Z' which would include models with a different OS, but then people would need to think about what's written where it now is instantly understood by anyone when putting everything under the Android nomenclature.
Of course, you were being rhetorical, and I therefore can only assume you're splitting hairs simply because you found an opening in someone's post. I usually can understand why people do what they do, even though I disagree or think it's silly. Still, I wonder why you do that.
Because software plays no relevance in a hardware durability test, simple fact, the S4 could be running any OS, it won't change the score it got because of that, in the same respect the iPhone could be running android and its score wouldn't magically decrease
IN A VACUUM, items of different weights fall at the same speed. In the atmosphere (where most people will be using their phones), you have to factor in air resistance. If two items are exactly the same size but have different weights, the heavier one will fall faster. OTOH, if they are different sizes but the same weight, the smaller one will fall faster.
The S4 is both larger and heavier. The two factors will counter each other to some extent, so it's impossible to say if it will fall faster or slower without doing the math (which also requires knowledge of the orientation when it falls). So the original statement was incorrect (because it didn't factor in size), but your statement that weight doesn't affect falling speeds is also wrong.
It's actually the same Surface Area that impacts Drag Force Resistance. Two objects can have the same size [Volume] but different Surface Area.
So is the price of the iPhone5 cheaper in Australia because of overstuff channels there too?
No, they are lower because the site is a grey market importer who undercuts the Australian recommended retail price, also the iPhone 5 is not less than half of the RRP like the S3.
The RRP is iPhone 5 $A799, Galaxy S4 $A849, S3 $749 and Galaxy Note 2 $A879.
Because software plays no relevance in a hardware durability test, simple fact, the S4 could be running any OS, it won't change the score it got because of that, in the same respect the iPhone could be running android and its score wouldn't magically decrease
I honestly have no idea how you can't understand that if a device comes with Android that it's not from Apple. The Android comment didn't imply that running Android makes HW less durable, it simply a general statement to indicate that it's not running on an iPhone and therefore those that come to this forum (like you!) that hate on everything Apple does will find fault with the methodology of the testing as they prefer Samsung, HTC, LG, or pretty much every other smartphone vendor except for Apple.
I think their slide test is inconclusive. Watch at minute 1.40-ish. When any liquid is present between the iPhone and the surface all friction goes out the door. That is how my iPhone met the floor for the first time. Thank goodness it was carpeted
I have an iPhone 3G coming up to five years old, a 4 almost 3 years old and a 5 almost a year old, they have had as many smashed screens as I have pom-poms (i.e. none).
Same here. In the 2.5 years my 3GS has been sitting in a drawer, the screen has not cracked at all. ;-)
This is a hardware duribility report, what has android got to do with it?
Well for one it mentioned Android and based on his defensive stance, I would say that he has some issues that need to be sorted out. There are a few open minded people on here who say "Go to the store, try out the phones and buy one that suits you" but those users are far and few between on here. People come to this site for 2 reasons:
1) Laugh at the zealots
2) Engage in 'debate' with people who all have the same opinion. Product A is the best and always will be. They do not want to hear about anything else because they are emotionally vested in the products they buy.
As I said earlier, the S3 price has dropped substantially as overstuffed channels need to be cleared.
Are you serious Apple have dropped the price due to competition and on specs value Samsung is more powerful phone, lets see what next iPhone costs and then we can compare. Again If you look at the original price, it is still little higher than the S4 (before discount).
Are you serious Apple have dropped the price due to competition and on specs value Samsung is more powerful phone, lets see what next iPhone costs and then we can compare. Again If you look at the original price, it is still little higher than the S4 (before discount).
The "original" price of the iPhone 5 is $A799, the "original" price of the S4 is $A849.
In specs value, the S4 is "way overpriced" compared to the Sony Xperia Z and the HTC One.
I honestly have no idea how you can't understand that if a device comes with Android that it's not from Apple. The Android comment didn't imply that running Android makes HW less durable, it simply a general statement to indicate that it's not running on an iPhone and therefore those that come to this forum (like you!) that hate on everything Apple does will find fault with the methodology of the testing as they prefer Samsung, HTC, LG, or pretty much every other smartphone vendor except for Apple.
I honestly have no idea how you don't understand that other manufacturers than Samsung make Android devices. They are comparing two Samsung devices, not Android.
Also, I am glad to see you are returning to your roots, I am not "hating on Apple" like you claim, where in my posts have I said anything like you claim, that's right, I haven't
The "original" price of the iPhone 5 is $A799, the "original" price of the S4 is $A849.
In specs value, the S4 is "way overpriced" compared to the Sony Xperia Z and the HTC One.
Come on your link shows the original price, so you have picked a site which may sell it for more? Since I was referring to IPhone 5 and S4, not sure why you mention HTC one. You may want to read cnet review.
Come on your link shows the original price, so you have picked a site which may sell it for more? Since I was referring to IPhone 5 and S4, not sure why you mention HTC one. You may want to read cnet review.
I use Australian recommended retail prices, the site I linked to directly imports phones (mainly from Hong Kong) so the pricing is slightly different.
"Speaking to CNET Australia, Tyler McGee, vice president of telecommunications for Samsung Electronics Australia, confirmed that the S4 will be available for $899 outright. Locally, the phone will carry a quad-core Snapdragon CPU running at 1.9GHz, not the so-called "octa-core" Exynos 5 processor."
Comments
Interesting use case for a durability scenario
Suddenly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal
Don't worry. The Android fanboy story-spinners that infest this forum will magically interpret this article as being an Apple-financed experiment.
It has become common knowledge that many of the Samsung fans online are paid by Samsung. Samsung even admits it !
http://www.techspot.com/news/52274-samsung-admits-to-posting-fake-user-reviews-on-the-web.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius
And my iPhone 4S slipped out of my coat pocket and fell about 3 feet onto concrete. Both the front and back glass were cracked. I'm sure if you look you can find someone that ran over their iPhone with a car and didn't have a scratch. I'm also sure you can find someone else who dropped theirs three inches and ended up with a cracked screen.
Personal anecdotes don't say anything about the real durability of a phone.
While I can agree with you on that last line, I used my "personal anecdote" to refute andrewb123 when he suggested
Quote:
Almost everyone I know with a 4/4s/5 has smashed the glass on their phone and needed a replacement.
That anecdote was ok for you though, right, or was what I talked about not allowed? This last year, specifically, I have been doing a lot of renos in and outside my house and have dropped it quite a few time (all without a case) and I'm just saying I have had nothing but the odd scratch/scuff on the corner. But, hey, thanks for saying my personal opinion doesn't matter, neither does calling out someone who is obviously exaggerating.
Originally Posted by Puevlo
Objects that weigh more will fall faster; therefore causing more damage to the device itself.
Not since 1589, they haven't.
Actually, the statement is true.
IN A VACUUM, items of different weights fall at the same speed. In the atmosphere (where most people will be using their phones), you have to factor in air resistance. If two items are exactly the same size but have different weights, the heavier one will fall faster. OTOH, if they are different sizes but the same weight, the smaller one will fall faster.
The S4 is both larger and heavier. The two factors will counter each other to some extent, so it's impossible to say if it will fall faster or slower without doing the math (which also requires knowledge of the orientation when it falls). So the original statement was incorrect (because it didn't factor in size), but your statement that weight doesn't affect falling speeds is also wrong.
Because software plays no relevance in a hardware durability test, simple fact, the S4 could be running any OS, it won't change the score it got because of that, in the same respect the iPhone could be running android and its score wouldn't magically decrease
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Actually, the statement is true.
IN A VACUUM, items of different weights fall at the same speed. In the atmosphere (where most people will be using their phones), you have to factor in air resistance. If two items are exactly the same size but have different weights, the heavier one will fall faster. OTOH, if they are different sizes but the same weight, the smaller one will fall faster.
The S4 is both larger and heavier. The two factors will counter each other to some extent, so it's impossible to say if it will fall faster or slower without doing the math (which also requires knowledge of the orientation when it falls). So the original statement was incorrect (because it didn't factor in size), but your statement that weight doesn't affect falling speeds is also wrong.
It's actually the same Surface Area that impacts Drag Force Resistance. Two objects can have the same size [Volume] but different Surface Area.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk
So is the price of the iPhone5 cheaper in Australia because of overstuff channels there too?
No, they are lower because the site is a grey market importer who undercuts the Australian recommended retail price, also the iPhone 5 is not less than half of the RRP like the S3.
The RRP is iPhone 5 $A799, Galaxy S4 $A849, S3 $749 and Galaxy Note 2 $A879.
I honestly have no idea how you can't understand that if a device comes with Android that it's not from Apple. The Android comment didn't imply that running Android makes HW less durable, it simply a general statement to indicate that it's not running on an iPhone and therefore those that come to this forum (like you!) that hate on everything Apple does will find fault with the methodology of the testing as they prefer Samsung, HTC, LG, or pretty much every other smartphone vendor except for Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
I have an iPhone 3G coming up to five years old, a 4 almost 3 years old and a 5 almost a year old, they have had as many smashed screens as I have pom-poms (i.e. none).
Same here. In the 2.5 years my 3GS has been sitting in a drawer, the screen has not cracked at all. ;-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Actually, the statement is true.
IN A VACUUM, items of different weights fall at the same speed. In the atmosphere (where most people will be using their phones),
Same speed? What speed would that be?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning
This is a hardware duribility report, what has android got to do with it?
Well for one it mentioned Android and based on his defensive stance, I would say that he has some issues that need to be sorted out. There are a few open minded people on here who say "Go to the store, try out the phones and buy one that suits you" but those users are far and few between on here. People come to this site for 2 reasons:
1) Laugh at the zealots
2) Engage in 'debate' with people who all have the same opinion. Product A is the best and always will be. They do not want to hear about anything else because they are emotionally vested in the products they buy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
I don't live in the USA either and the price of the Note 2 and Galaxy S4 are higher than the iPhone 5.
Australian prices.
As I said earlier, the S3 price has dropped substantially as overstuffed channels need to be cleared.
Are you serious Apple have dropped the price due to competition and on specs value Samsung is more powerful phone, lets see what next iPhone costs and then we can compare. Again If you look at the original price, it is still little higher than the S4 (before discount).
The "original" price of the iPhone 5 is $A799, the "original" price of the S4 is $A849.
In specs value, the S4 is "way overpriced" compared to the Sony Xperia Z and the HTC One.
I honestly have no idea how you don't understand that other manufacturers than Samsung make Android devices. They are comparing two Samsung devices, not Android.
Also, I am glad to see you are returning to your roots, I am not "hating on Apple" like you claim, where in my posts have I said anything like you claim, that's right, I haven't
Come on your link shows the original price, so you have picked a site which may sell it for more? Since I was referring to IPhone 5 and S4, not sure why you mention HTC one. You may want to read cnet review.
Quote:
Originally Posted by souliisoul
Come on your link shows the original price, so you have picked a site which may sell it for more? Since I was referring to IPhone 5 and S4, not sure why you mention HTC one. You may want to read cnet review.
I use Australian recommended retail prices, the site I linked to directly imports phones (mainly from Hong Kong) so the pricing is slightly different.
"Speaking to CNET Australia, Tyler McGee, vice president of telecommunications for Samsung Electronics Australia, confirmed that the S4 will be available for $899 outright. Locally, the phone will carry a quad-core Snapdragon CPU running at 1.9GHz, not the so-called "octa-core" Exynos 5 processor."
Source
Why?
Because people persist in claiming Apple products are "way overpriced", when similar products are priced in the same ballpark.
The Sony and HTC offer better value than the S4, as they offer similar performance at a lower cost.
i.e. why does the LTE enabled S4 with off the shelf parts from Qualcomm and Sony cost more than an iPhone 5?