That may be the explanation. However, all other things being equal I'm not sure that a longer structure is ever more resistant to bending, irrespective of how the forces are distributed.
If you increase rigidity enough, and are able to distribute the forces somewhere else, you can immensely improve your ability to witstand strong forces. Planes are not very thick pieces of metal that would be ripped appart if not for the structural integrity of internal bracing.
The key is withstanding the forces that reflect real world conditions of their targetted users, not being bomb proof. If there were a large market for $2500 bomb proof Iphones, I'm sure they'd oblige and sell you one. Probably would not be as light or thin though and battery life compared to other phones of the same size would certainly be lower.
Samsung uses a physical button on their devices just like Apple and HTC has front facing speakers which add to the bezel. What you're looking for is the LG G3. It's almost all screen.
The battery is what weights the most, secondly it would be the material used. So, a plastic phone would be slightly lighter than an alumium one. If you look at actual weight of phones, plastic phones are slightly lighter at the same internal volume. Battery weights about the same for everyone so you don't really get much difference in weight because of that.
I slightly pity, but mostly laugh at anybody who was so naive as to fall for the completely bogus and fabricated 'bendgate' story.
What ever happened to critical thinking and common sense? Whatever happened to waiting for real evidence to emerge, and not relying on extremely anecdotal and questionable evidence, which came in the form of one anonymous forum post and one shitty youtube video? I sure wouldn't want any of the sorry suckers who fell for this story to be sitting on the jury, if I happened to be on trial.
The people who were duped by 'bendgate' would feel right at home in 1692 Massachusetts, savagely killing completely innocent people in the most barbaric fashion available during the Salem witch trials. When you take stupidity and combine it with mass hysteria and viral videos, you get 'bendgate'.
This dumb ass generation of Youtube ignoramuses and uneducated slackers will believe and fall for practically anything. Mankind is surely doomed. How many millions of hits did that piece of junk, amateurish video get again?
And the grimy dumbasses just kept piling on, emerging from under their damp and cold rocks, thinking that they're cute, posting fake photoshopped pictures of bent iPhones everywhere. And once again, we saw all sorts of despicable media outlets helping to broadcast and spread this lie, simply because Apple was involved. I wonder when they will offer their retractions? I wouldn't hold my breath for that.
We got the first confirmation that 'bendgate' was a lie from Apple itself, when they invited the media to tour their test facilities, where they showed how thousands of devices get tested in their state of the art lab. And now we finally have independent confirmation from Consumer Reports, which has also conducted tests in their own lab.
This whole 'bendgate' myth has now officially been busted!
A few morons and Apple haters like to call Apple fans sheep, but let me tell you, the real sheep are the people who were duped by 'bendgate' and those foolish individuals who actually believed it. They're like a herd of animals who would follow a stampede right off of a cliff, to their miserable and lousy deaths, simply because that's what everybody else was doing.
I absolutely love you! Put Apple in it and 'Houston we have a problem'. It is a shame that popular media stoops this low just to get clicks and air time. If it's on tv or you tube it must be true. And what is sick is the media outlets pick up this crap with nary an ounce of research to support their reports.
That may be the explanation. However, all other things being equal I'm not sure that a longer structure is ever more resistant to bending, irrespective of how the forces are distributed.
If you increase rigidity enough, and are able to distribute the forces somewhere else, you can immensely improve your ability to witstand strong forces. Planes are not very thick pieces of metal that would be ripped appart if not for the structural integrity of internal bracing.
The key is withstanding the forces that reflect real world conditions of their targetted users, not being bomb proof. If there were a large market for $2500 bomb proof Iphones, I'm sure they'd oblige and sell you one. Probably would not be as light or thin though and battery life compared to other phones of the same size would certainly be lower.
Right - but if you think of the longer phone as just being equivalent to the shorter phone with extra length added on, then any given element of the structure will have similar strength, but the overall structure can be subjected to greater bending moments for equivalent forces because they can be further from the fulcrum. Adding extra reinforcement to the longer phone (as you postulated earlier) obviously can make it arbitrarily stronger, but adding similar extra reinforcement to the shorter phone would make it even stronger still.
1) How did you arrive at commendably? I see the same center point test on various sized devices but nothing in that says that any of those thresholds are either commendable or reprehensible, just a comparative value.
2) Based on your snark, gold would no longer be a premium material for jewelry because it'll bend more readily than piece of wrought iron 4x its thickness. Sounds like a wonderful scale in which to decide what is and isn't premium¡
3) The bottom line comes down to, "Is the device going to bend in your pocket or under any other normal wear and tear? If the answer is no, then there is nothing else to consider.
Don't worry as you can tell they are a lot of a-holes posting comments here. Like your point about gold. Apple is now at the level that anything they do is being scrutinized. If it wasn't the frame, someone would have eventually dropped it and said that the screen shatters into tiny pieces. I'm getting one. Not listening to a bunch of moronic jackasses looking for any excuse to hate. And a lot of them like to claim we say Samsung's phones are plastic and thus inferior. IMO Samsung phones run Android and if they were made out of the most pristine durable material I still wasn't buying any because I prefer iOS. Period.
Right - but if you think of the longer phone as just being equivalent to the shorter phone with extra length added on, then any given element of the structure will have similar strength, but the overall structure can be subjected to greater bending moments for equivalent forces because they can be further from the fulcrum. Adding extra reinforcement to the longer phone (as you postulated earlier) obviously can make it arbitrarily stronger, but adding similar extra reinforcement to the shorter phone would make it even stronger still.
Well, if they're engineering to actual real world use case of their target market, they wouldn't need to make the shorter one stronger :-). The tests didn't really take that into account. The 6+ would need to be stronger because well, it doesn't experience the same forces in the same way.
The smaller phone also has a lot less internals to work with to put extra bracing. It already has a 40% smaller battery than the 6+. So, over engineering it is even less of an option than the 6+.
While I enjoyed their video on the iPhone 6 plus bendgate. I think it's missing the point. Hopefully not on purpose. They were only bending them for 10 seconds and then letting them flex back. But the reports I've herard are that they bend when stressed for hours at a time in pants poket. As I am wanting to get an iPhone 6 plus when they are available. And I cary my phone in my front jeans pocket I would be interested in seeing the test done again.
If they could redo the test at 10 and 20 pounds and hold it for 1 hour, then 2 hours and so on to see how long it takes for it to not flex back. That would be more reflective of the reports. The other thing they should do to make it more scientific is test how much force an object the size of the iPhone 6 plus receives in tight jeans when sitting. And use that as the weight they use to hold for icrimental hours at a time.
Consumer Reports is not exactly a great source. Nobody who has a clue about cars takes their automotive recommendations seriously, for example.
Nobody who has any concern for the look of their new 2014 car plops themselves down in the center of the front hood when hanging out at the boulevard in front of the beach or when watching 4th of July fireworks. You'd be appropriately afraid of putting an indentation in the hood. If the weight of sitting on your car can do that, common sense would also dictate you shouldn't sit on your expensive electronic gadgets.
Nobody who has any concern for the look of their new 2014 car plops themselves down in the center of the front hood when hanging out at the boulevard in front of the beach or when watching 4th of July fireworks. You'd be appropriately afraid of putting an indentation in the hood. If the weight of sitting on your car can do that, common sense would also dictate you shouldn't sit on your expensive electronic gadgets.
I think you misunderstood me. I think the phone is fine. I was merely supporting Tallest Skil's statement that CR is generally useless.
Nobody does this to their phones, regardless of manufacturer. Don't sit on it, and you're fine. If you have the iPhone, get AppleCare, and stop complaining about your first world problems.
The one thing with this 3-point stress test (similar to Apple's) is the fulcrum is spread along the width of the iPhone. These "bendgate" videos had to have the user's thumb offset from the middle and lined up with the volume control opening. The user then applied the large amount of pressure. Although I believe that the iPhone 6+ would bend in these circumstances, I also believe that these circumstances have to be carefully recreated and are not even close to how the phone is used in real life usage. In a couple weeks, we'll hear about "hammergate" how the iPhone actually broke when struck by a sledgehammer.....because you know....hitting your iPhone with a sledgehammer is normal usage.
So only people with two hands coming out their but should be worried.
Looking at the numbers, the iPhone 6 showed signs of deformation (bending) at 70 pounds of force, compared to 90 pounds for the iPhone 6 Plus. Complete screen separation occurred at 100 pounds for the iPhone 6, while the 6 Plus made it to 110 pounds before breaking.
The most resilient device tested was the plastic-backed Samsung's Galaxy Note 3, which bounced back from stepped stress tests until the screen finally shattered at 150 pounds of pressure. Following the Galaxy Note was Apple's last-generation iPhone 5, which took 130 pounds to bend and 150 pounds to break. LG's G3 shared characteristics with the Note 3, returning to an unbent state after each successive test, but succumbed to breakage at 130 pounds.
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, followed by case separation a 90 pounds.
I love the bias on this site.
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.
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.
1) The original complaint is that the iPhone 6 Plus is weaker than the iPhone 6. This test says otherwise.
2) The original complaint is that the iPhone 6 Plus will bend in your pocket under normal wear and teat. This test says otherwise.
3) What evidence do you have that indicates the load on the materials is so incredibly low that the iPhone 6 is essentially modeling clay in your hands? Zero!
Looking at the numbers, the iPhone 6 showed signs of deformation (bending) at 70 pounds of force, compared to 90 pounds for the iPhone 6 Plus. Complete screen separation occurred at 100 pounds for the iPhone 6, while the 6 Plus made it to 110 pounds before breaking.
The most resilient device tested was the plastic-backed Samsung's Galaxy Note 3, which bounced back from stepped stress tests until the screen finally shattered at 150 pounds of pressure. Following the Galaxy Note was Apple's last-generation iPhone 5, which took 130 pounds to bend and 150 pounds to break. LG's G3 shared characteristics with the Note 3, returning to an unbent state after each successive test, but succumbed to breakage at 130 pounds.
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, followed by case separation a 90 pounds.
I love the bias on this site.
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.
Right - but firstly, no one has been complaining about the HTC One - in fact it is a highly regarded phone, and secondly, until now it has not been a metric for acceptance that a phone cannot be bent using ones bare hands. Somehow, the assertion that the new iPhones will bend if kept in a pocket (apparently no significant evidence of this) has been conflated with deliberate manual abuse - a fate that most, if not all large phones are subject to.
Is it just me or is anyone else impressed with all the screens that are still intact even after the rest of the phone is destroyed?! I was nervous about the screen before #bendgate now I'm thinking it's indestructible! - I have a new case coming in, so not really, but you catch my drift.
Oh, I wouldn't go quite that far. In the latest Consumer Reports I believe they recommend a Sony phone over the iPhones. They have weird criteria. I seldom find myself in agreement.
Not so hard to understand. I wrote a Swift program to emulate the process:
Comments
That may be the explanation. However, all other things being equal I'm not sure that a longer structure is ever more resistant to bending, irrespective of how the forces are distributed.
If you increase rigidity enough, and are able to distribute the forces somewhere else, you can immensely improve your ability to witstand strong forces. Planes are not very thick pieces of metal that would be ripped appart if not for the structural integrity of internal bracing.
The key is withstanding the forces that reflect real world conditions of their targetted users, not being bomb proof. If there were a large market for $2500 bomb proof Iphones, I'm sure they'd oblige and sell you one. Probably would not be as light or thin though and battery life compared to other phones of the same size would certainly be lower.
Samsung uses a physical button on their devices just like Apple and HTC has front facing speakers which add to the bezel. What you're looking for is the LG G3. It's almost all screen.
The battery is what weights the most, secondly it would be the material used. So, a plastic phone would be slightly lighter than an alumium one. If you look at actual weight of phones, plastic phones are slightly lighter at the same internal volume. Battery weights about the same for everyone so you don't really get much difference in weight because of that.
That may be the explanation. However, all other things being equal I'm not sure that a longer structure is ever more resistant to bending, irrespective of how the forces are distributed.
If you increase rigidity enough, and are able to distribute the forces somewhere else, you can immensely improve your ability to witstand strong forces. Planes are not very thick pieces of metal that would be ripped appart if not for the structural integrity of internal bracing.
The key is withstanding the forces that reflect real world conditions of their targetted users, not being bomb proof. If there were a large market for $2500 bomb proof Iphones, I'm sure they'd oblige and sell you one. Probably would not be as light or thin though and battery life compared to other phones of the same size would certainly be lower.
Right - but if you think of the longer phone as just being equivalent to the shorter phone with extra length added on, then any given element of the structure will have similar strength, but the overall structure can be subjected to greater bending moments for equivalent forces because they can be further from the fulcrum. Adding extra reinforcement to the longer phone (as you postulated earlier) obviously can make it arbitrarily stronger, but adding similar extra reinforcement to the shorter phone would make it even stronger still.
Right - but if you think of the longer phone as just being equivalent to the shorter phone with extra length added on, then any given element of the structure will have similar strength, but the overall structure can be subjected to greater bending moments for equivalent forces because they can be further from the fulcrum. Adding extra reinforcement to the longer phone (as you postulated earlier) obviously can make it arbitrarily stronger, but adding similar extra reinforcement to the shorter phone would make it even stronger still.
Well, if they're engineering to actual real world use case of their target market, they wouldn't need to make the shorter one stronger :-). The tests didn't really take that into account. The 6+ would need to be stronger because well, it doesn't experience the same forces in the same way.
The smaller phone also has a lot less internals to work with to put extra bracing. It already has a 40% smaller battery than the 6+. So, over engineering it is even less of an option than the 6+.
I think it's missing the point. Hopefully not on purpose.
They were only bending them for 10 seconds and then letting them flex back. But the reports I've herard are that they bend when stressed for hours at a time in pants poket.
As I am wanting to get an iPhone 6 plus when they are available. And I cary my phone in my front jeans pocket I would be interested in seeing the test done again.
If they could redo the test at 10 and 20 pounds and hold it for 1 hour, then 2 hours and so on to see how long it takes for it to not flex back. That would be more reflective of the reports.
The other thing they should do to make it more scientific is test how much force an object the size of the iPhone 6 plus receives in tight jeans when sitting. And use that as the weight they use to hold for icrimental hours at a time.
Consumer Reports is not exactly a great source. Nobody who has a clue about cars takes their automotive recommendations seriously, for example.
Nobody who has any concern for the look of their new 2014 car plops themselves down in the center of the front hood when hanging out at the boulevard in front of the beach or when watching 4th of July fireworks. You'd be appropriately afraid of putting an indentation in the hood. If the weight of sitting on your car can do that, common sense would also dictate you shouldn't sit on your expensive electronic gadgets.
I think you misunderstood me. I think the phone is fine. I was merely supporting Tallest Skil's statement that CR is generally useless.
Meh... Wake me when all this childish vandalism is over.
The one thing with this 3-point stress test (similar to Apple's) is the fulcrum is spread along the width of the iPhone. These "bendgate" videos had to have the user's thumb offset from the middle and lined up with the volume control opening. The user then applied the large amount of pressure. Although I believe that the iPhone 6+ would bend in these circumstances, I also believe that these circumstances have to be carefully recreated and are not even close to how the phone is used in real life usage. In a couple weeks, we'll hear about "hammergate" how the iPhone actually broke when struck by a sledgehammer.....because you know....hitting your iPhone with a sledgehammer is normal usage.
So only people with two hands coming out their but should be worried.
Looking at the numbers, the iPhone 6 showed signs of deformation (bending) at 70 pounds of force, compared to 90 pounds for the iPhone 6 Plus. Complete screen separation occurred at 100 pounds for the iPhone 6, while the 6 Plus made it to 110 pounds before breaking.
The most resilient device tested was the plastic-backed Samsung's Galaxy Note 3, which bounced back from stepped stress tests until the screen finally shattered at 150 pounds of pressure. Following the Galaxy Note was Apple's last-generation iPhone 5, which took 130 pounds to bend and 150 pounds to break. LG's G3 shared characteristics with the Note 3, returning to an unbent state after each successive test, but succumbed to breakage at 130 pounds.
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, followed by case separation a 90 pounds.
I love the bias on this site.
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.
1) The original complaint is that the iPhone 6 Plus is weaker than the iPhone 6. This test says otherwise.
2) The original complaint is that the iPhone 6 Plus will bend in your pocket under normal wear and teat. This test says otherwise.
3) What evidence do you have that indicates the load on the materials is so incredibly low that the iPhone 6 is essentially modeling clay in your hands? Zero!
Looking at the numbers, the iPhone 6 showed signs of deformation (bending) at 70 pounds of force, compared to 90 pounds for the iPhone 6 Plus. Complete screen separation occurred at 100 pounds for the iPhone 6, while the 6 Plus made it to 110 pounds before breaking.
The most resilient device tested was the plastic-backed Samsung's Galaxy Note 3, which bounced back from stepped stress tests until the screen finally shattered at 150 pounds of pressure. Following the Galaxy Note was Apple's last-generation iPhone 5, which took 130 pounds to bend and 150 pounds to break. LG's G3 shared characteristics with the Note 3, returning to an unbent state after each successive test, but succumbed to breakage at 130 pounds.
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, followed by case separation a 90 pounds.
I love the bias on this site.
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.
Right - but firstly, no one has been complaining about the HTC One - in fact it is a highly regarded phone, and secondly, until now it has not been a metric for acceptance that a phone cannot be bent using ones bare hands. Somehow, the assertion that the new iPhones will bend if kept in a pocket (apparently no significant evidence of this) has been conflated with deliberate manual abuse - a fate that most, if not all large phones are subject to.
Not so hard to understand. I wrote a Swift program to emulate the process:
if (phone.brand == "Apple") {
println("not recommend")
} else {
println("recommend")
}
Can't you also do this?
if (??.™ == "?") { println("????") } else { println("????") }