Won’t happen once Europe forces Apple to have a removable battery on iPhone. Then I imagine European customers won’t have as good an outcome in similar circumstances and flood Apple Champs-Elysées with pitchforks, perplexed and angry that their iPhones aren’t as water resistant.
*rolleyes* yet another poster who is far better at jumping to conclusions and histrionics than reading comprehension.
I suppose lagoons aren't very deep? No mention of water level based on my brief poking around of teh Interwebs.
Seven Seas Lagoon is pretty big, and more than 100 feet at the deepest point. This said, we have no idea exactly where in the phone was dropped, be it during boat travel, or next to a pier.
Thank you! My only prior experience was wanting to see The Blue Lagoon but being too young.
I suppose lagoons aren't very deep? No mention of water level based on my brief poking around of teh Interwebs.
Seven Seas Lagoon is pretty big, and more than 100 feet at the deepest point. This said, we have no idea exactly where in the phone was dropped, be it during boat travel, or next to a pier.
Thank you! My only prior experience was wanting to see The Blue Lagoon but being too young.
According to Wikipedia it's only 14 feet (~4 meters) deep. I couldn't find out big it is, but it looks to be about 150 acres (0.6 sq km)
If you have it set to upload your photos to iCloud, I believe you can set it to only do it with WiFi. They may not have had a chance to be on WiFi during the time between the Halloween party and the dunk in the lagoon.
FYI, in iOS 13 you can turn on Photos syncing while on cellular (Settings - Photos - Cellular Data).
I suppose lagoons aren't very deep? No mention of water level based on my brief poking around of teh Interwebs.
Other versions of the story or internet sleuthing suggest the lagoons are about 14 feet or about 4.2 meters deep near the docks. Could be deeper elsewhere along the rides or water routes.
In fact, there was no guarantee that this particular phone would survive either and away from exceptional cases like this one, the impact on repairability or replacing is unnecessarily high IMO.
Are you implying that case improved the iPhones water resistance? The same case that allowed sand to get between itself and the phone.
"I was able to retrieve all of the pictures from our Disney Halloween night, and besides some sand in my case and a little algae on the cover, the phone seems no worse for the wear," she said, noting that the device was only protected by a thin silicone case.
In fact, there was no guarantee that this particular phone would survive either and away from exceptional cases like this one, the impact on repairability or replacing is unnecessarily high IMO.
Are you implying that case improved the iPhones water resistance? The same case that allowed sand to get between itself and the phone.
"I was able to retrieve all of the pictures from our Disney Halloween night, and besides some sand in my case and a little algae on the cover, the phone seems no worse for the wear," she said, noting that the device was only protected by a thin silicone case.
The case I was referring to was 'case' as in incident, not 'case' as in 'protective'.
If you have it set to upload your photos to iCloud, I believe you can set it to only do it with WiFi. They may not have had a chance to be on WiFi during the time between the Halloween party and the dunk in the lagoon.
The Disney in-park wi-fi is pretty good. I don't have good numbers on data transfer speeds, but it beats the 4G speed and responsiveness for the most part.
That said, it sounds like the family wasn't using iCloud syncing at all, based on comments that they've made. I'm glad that Disney was able to fish the iPhone out.
I was at Walt Disney World's Magic Kingdom and still have the results from a Speedtest near Splash Mountain on 7/19/2019 on my iPhone 7: 1.24 Mbps down, 1.77 Mbps up, ping 3 ms, jitter 78 ms, and packet loss 28%. This was on the Disney-Guest SSID.
If you have it set to upload your photos to iCloud, I believe you can set it to only do it with WiFi. They may not have had a chance to be on WiFi during the time between the Halloween party and the dunk in the lagoon.
The Disney in-park wi-fi is pretty good. I don't have good numbers on data transfer speeds, but it beats the 4G speed and responsiveness for the most part.
That said, it sounds like the family wasn't using iCloud syncing at all, based on comments that they've made. I'm glad that Disney was able to fish the iPhone out.
I was at Walt Disney World's Magic Kingdom and still have the results from a Speedtest near Splash Mountain on 7/19/2019 on my iPhone 7: 1.24 Mbps down, 1.77 Mbps up, ping 3 ms, jitter 78 ms, and packet loss 28%. This was on the Disney-Guest SSID.
It was way, way better than that in November. Sounds like crowd density was a big difference between the two.
If you have it set to upload your photos to iCloud, I believe you can set it to only do it with WiFi. They may not have had a chance to be on WiFi during the time between the Halloween party and the dunk in the lagoon.
The Disney in-park wi-fi is pretty good. I don't have good numbers on data transfer speeds, but it beats the 4G speed and responsiveness for the most part.
That said, it sounds like the family wasn't using iCloud syncing at all, based on comments that they've made. I'm glad that Disney was able to fish the iPhone out.
I was at Walt Disney World's Magic Kingdom and still have the results from a Speedtest near Splash Mountain on 7/19/2019 on my iPhone 7: 1.24 Mbps down, 1.77 Mbps up, ping 3 ms, jitter 78 ms, and packet loss 28%. This was on the Disney-Guest SSID.
It was way, way better than that in November. Sounds like crowd density was a big difference between the two.
Won’t happen once Europe forces Apple to have a removable battery on iPhone. Then I imagine European customers won’t have as good an outcome in similar circumstances and flood Apple Champs-Elysées with pitchforks, perplexed and angry that their iPhones aren’t as water resistant.
*rolleyes* yet another poster who is far better at jumping to conclusions and histrionics than reading comprehension.
Just foreshadowing combining the reading and comprehension of two stories. No need for the cheap attempt at an insult buddy.
Won’t happen once Europe forces Apple to have a removable battery on iPhone. Then I imagine European customers won’t have as good an outcome in similar circumstances and flood Apple Champs-Elysées with pitchforks, perplexed and angry that their iPhones aren’t as water resistant.
What makes you think a removable battery wouldn't allow this to happen?
The IP rating is simply a rating. How it is met doesn't depend on the presence of audio jacks, removable batteries etc. [...]
Whenever a phone is submerged in water (or lost in water) you still have to cross your fingers. I'm happy for the owners of this phone because they retrieved the device AND got the contents off. Luckily involuntary water immersion is not a common occurrence. Battery replacement is.
To maintain the lever of water resistance and have a removable battery, would mandate making the device much larger. We don't want that. We want thin devices. We confirm this want by choosing and buying iPhones, known for their slimness, from a marketplace of competitors. You want a brick, go for it.
Involuntary water immersion happens all the time. Far more often than I need to replace the battery. An iPhone gets years of use from a battery, sometimes many (I have older 4s backups with original batteries). So at most a battery change after 2-3 years. But pools, beaches, toilets, etc, are things my household comes in cross with multiple times in that timeframe.
Probably not. Most smartphone users don't backup anything. They connect a cable when their memory gets full and offload.
And not even that. I am my family & friends' IT guy and most don't even know how to offload their photos. They think buying a new phone with more storage is easier, LOL.
Won’t happen once Europe forces Apple to have a removable battery on iPhone. Then I imagine European customers won’t have as good an outcome in similar circumstances and flood Apple Champs-Elysées with pitchforks, perplexed and angry that their iPhones aren’t as water resistant.
What makes you think a removable battery wouldn't allow this to happen?
The IP rating is simply a rating. How it is met doesn't depend on the presence of audio jacks, removable batteries etc. [...]
Whenever a phone is submerged in water (or lost in water) you still have to cross your fingers. I'm happy for the owners of this phone because they retrieved the device AND got the contents off. Luckily involuntary water immersion is not a common occurrence. Battery replacement is.
To maintain the lever of water resistance and have a removable battery, would mandate making the device much larger. We don't want that. We want thin devices. We confirm this want by choosing and buying iPhones, known for their slimness, from a marketplace of competitors. You want a brick, go for it.
Involuntary water immersion happens all the time. Far more often than I need to replace the battery. An iPhone gets years of use from a battery, sometimes many (I have older 4s backups with original batteries). So at most a battery change after 2-3 years. But pools, beaches, toilets, etc, are things my household comes in cross with multiple times in that timeframe.
It skimps over the reasons why this entirely speculated change may happen and then goes off at a tangent on size, weight, waterproofing.
Those would largely (or even entirely) be irrelevant if the EU were to impose such a requirement. Such a requirement would be based off of completely different goals.
Let's go through your and Fast Company's claims.
You say 'much larger'. They say 'way bigger' but neither of the claims is qualified in any way. How much bigger is 'much' or 'way'.
The claim is made about swapping batteries out in daily use. I doubt this would actually happen like that. If you are going to carry a spare battery around it is far more likely to be a universal external battery. The point isn't 'daily use'. The point is being able to easily replace a failing or poor performing battery. This means manufacturers wouldn't need massive stocks of batteries and could react in line with demand. The point is not having to stress the design during the switch.
Current phones already have a seal for the entire phone. Adding a replaceable battery isn't going to be a big deal in that sense. Also, and once again, no mention of nano coatings has been made. Coatings which have been on the market for years and are designed to handle water ingress. In fact nano coatings are already used by some manufacturers, Xiaomi being a well known user. In the case of Apple, I don't know.
Swapping out a battery today, invariably means pulling the screen off the device and breaking the seal. A good battery swap probably means replacing that seal. Being able to replace a battery without risking damage to the device itself is a plus.
Your claim that we want thinner phones is not supported by much in the way of actual evidence but as I said, if this is down to legislation, what 'we' want would be redundant.
As for immersion cases being somehow more common than battery replacements I have seen nothing to support that. My personal experience from people I know is of just two cases in more than ten years. One was a toilet and the other was a washing machine. I have literally lost count of the amount of battery replacements.
How manufacturers approach any such legislation is another matter. I have already thrown an idea into the ring. That of a phone without a main battery and the option to BTO a battery at purchase to the capacity, size and weight of the preferences of the purchaser. Effectively a phone in two parts.
Won’t happen once Europe forces Apple to have a removable battery on iPhone. Then I imagine European customers won’t have as good an outcome in similar circumstances and flood Apple Champs-Elysées with pitchforks, perplexed and angry that their iPhones aren’t as water resistant.
What makes you think a removable battery wouldn't allow this to happen?
The IP rating is simply a rating. How it is met doesn't depend on the presence of audio jacks, removable batteries etc. [...]
Whenever a phone is submerged in water (or lost in water) you still have to cross your fingers. I'm happy for the owners of this phone because they retrieved the device AND got the contents off. Luckily involuntary water immersion is not a common occurrence. Battery replacement is.
To maintain the lever of water resistance and have a removable battery, would mandate making the device much larger. We don't want that. We want thin devices. We confirm this want by choosing and buying iPhones, known for their slimness, from a marketplace of competitors. You want a brick, go for it.
Involuntary water immersion happens all the time. Far more often than I need to replace the battery. An iPhone gets years of use from a battery, sometimes many (I have older 4s backups with original batteries). So at most a battery change after 2-3 years. But pools, beaches, toilets, etc, are things my household comes in cross with multiple times in that timeframe.
As for immersion cases being somehow more common than battery replacements I have seen nothing to support that. My personal experience from people I know is of just two cases in more than ten years. One was a toilet and the other was a washing machine. I have literally lost count of the amount of battery replacements.
Well said. Regarding immersion cases Vs battery replacements - Even if immersion cases are pretty high (for example, once a month as against once in 2 years for battery replacement), what needs to be done to handle the situation matters. As you mentioned already, nano coating is sufficient to ensure splash resistance. Apple/any other OEM is not going to provide replacement phone for water damage and it is not covered under warranty. People do not need IPx ratings for their phones, which do not mean much in any case.
(Oops, this was originally a duplicate post. I'll make the best of it.)
I will add that with Photo Stream and cellular data for Photos enabled, pics and vids are uploaded close to when they are taken, so even if it ends up underwater (or otherwise out of service), anything the phone was able to upload beforehand will be stored in the cloud. I use it all the time with my multiple phones, iPads, and Macs (I'm a developer and photographer/videographer and have a tendency to collect Apple gear).
iCloud/Photos can sync over LTE. When I was in Israel in 2018, I turned on unlimited data through T-Mobile because the hotel WiFi was so bad. I also turned on cellular data for iCloud and Photos.
Overnight, the device uploaded 37GB of photos and videos over LTE, something it hasn't been able to do over the WiFi for nearly two weeks.
(Unfortunately T-Mobile had a worldwide roaming throttling issue for the next couple of days and I didn't get to enjoy full LTE speeds the rest of the trip. They refunded the unlimited roaming fees as a consolation.)
Comments
yet another poster who is far better at jumping to conclusions and histrionics than reading comprehension.
"I was able to retrieve all of the pictures from our Disney Halloween night, and besides some sand in my case and a little algae on the cover, the phone seems no worse for the wear," she said, noting that the device was only protected by a thin silicone case.
The case I was referring to was 'case' as in incident, not 'case' as in 'protective'.
To maintain the lever of water resistance and have a removable battery, would mandate making the device much larger. We don't want that. We want thin devices. We confirm this want by choosing and buying iPhones, known for their slimness, from a marketplace of competitors. You want a brick, go for it.
Involuntary water immersion happens all the time. Far more often than I need to replace the battery. An iPhone gets years of use from a battery, sometimes many (I have older 4s backups with original batteries). So at most a battery change after 2-3 years. But pools, beaches, toilets, etc, are things my household comes in cross with multiple times in that timeframe.
https://www.fastcompany.com/90469631/four-reasons-why-a-removable-battery-on-the-iphone-is-a-horrible-idea
It skimps over the reasons why this entirely speculated change may happen and then goes off at a tangent on size, weight, waterproofing.
Those would largely (or even entirely) be irrelevant if the EU were to impose such a requirement. Such a requirement would be based off of completely different goals.
Let's go through your and Fast Company's claims.
You say 'much larger'. They say 'way bigger' but neither of the claims is qualified in any way. How much bigger is 'much' or 'way'.
The claim is made about swapping batteries out in daily use. I doubt this would actually happen like that. If you are going to carry a spare battery around it is far more likely to be a universal external battery. The point isn't 'daily use'. The point is being able to easily replace a failing or poor performing battery. This means manufacturers wouldn't need massive stocks of batteries and could react in line with demand. The point is not having to stress the design during the switch.
Current phones already have a seal for the entire phone. Adding a replaceable battery isn't going to be a big deal in that sense. Also, and once again, no mention of nano coatings has been made. Coatings which have been on the market for years and are designed to handle water ingress. In fact nano coatings are already used by some manufacturers, Xiaomi being a well known user. In the case of Apple, I don't know.
Swapping out a battery today, invariably means pulling the screen off the device and breaking the seal. A good battery swap probably means replacing that seal. Being able to replace a battery without risking damage to the device itself is a plus.
Your claim that we want thinner phones is not supported by much in the way of actual evidence but as I said, if this is down to legislation, what 'we' want would be redundant.
As for immersion cases being somehow more common than battery replacements I have seen nothing to support that. My personal experience from people I know is of just two cases in more than ten years. One was a toilet and the other was a washing machine. I have literally lost count of the amount of battery replacements.
How manufacturers approach any such legislation is another matter. I have already thrown an idea into the ring. That of a phone without a main battery and the option to BTO a battery at purchase to the capacity, size and weight of the preferences of the purchaser. Effectively a phone in two parts.
I will add that with Photo Stream and cellular data for Photos enabled, pics and vids are uploaded close to when they are taken, so even if it ends up underwater (or otherwise out of service), anything the phone was able to upload beforehand will be stored in the cloud. I use it all the time with my multiple phones, iPads, and Macs (I'm a developer and photographer/videographer and have a tendency to collect Apple gear).
Just in case anyone didn't know this...
Overnight, the device uploaded 37GB of photos and videos over LTE, something it hasn't been able to do over the WiFi for nearly two weeks.