Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Consumer Reports Ranks iPhone X Below iPhone 8 Because of Durability and Battery Life

Relentless Power said:
In some respects, It can completely be overblown towards what's considered durable based on how the test is subjective. But your ultimately it's depending on what the user is using for protection and the results of the test. They're are too many variables what can happen to a phone in general when it comes to breaking it and they all scenarios in general can't be tested.
Click to expand...

No really, in most respects durability can be tested, and averaging those variables applied to a sample group is how tests are performed. Durability isn't a reflection of all possibilities.
In other news, metal is more resistant to shattering than glass, which may improve the product's durability in typical drop scenarios.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DUIduckSAUCE
MacRumors said:



Consumer Reports today shared its final iPhone X testing results, and while the site has given the iPhone X a recommendation, Apple's new flagship smartphone has been ranked below the iPhone 8 and the iPhone 8 Plus in the Consumer Reports recommended list.

The iPhone X did make the Consumer Reports list of top 10 smartphones in the number 9 slot, but the site says it did not beat out the iPhone 8 or the iPhone 8 Plus because of its poor performance on a durability test. Both the iPhone 8 and the iPhone 8 Plus better survived a tumble test for emulating real-world drops and fumbles of about 2.5 feet that can result in device damage, despite the fact that all three devices have glass bodies.


After 50-100 tumbles, one iPhone X model suffered serious body damage, while two others had screen defects. The iPhone 8 and 8 Plus ended up with just a few scrapes after the test. Front displays for the iPhone X, 8, and 8 Plus all came away unscathed, and the iPhone X did well on scratch tests and water resistance tests.

iphonexconsumerreports.jpg
Consumer Reports also had some complaints about the iPhone X battery life, which does not last as long as the battery in Samsung phones like the Galaxy S8. The iPhone X lasted 19.5 hours in the Consumer Reports battery test, compared to 26 hours for the Samsung Galaxy S8 and 21 hours for the iPhone 8 Plus.

The iPhone X didn't fare well on durability or battery tests, but it did earn the highest camera score out of all the smartphones tested by Consumer Reports. The site also listed the OLED display and the Face ID facial recognition system as iPhone X strengths.Overall, Consumer Reports continues to rank the Samsung Galaxy S8 and the Samsung Galaxy S8+ as its top two recommended smartphones, mainly due to superior battery life, followed by the iPhone 8 Plus and the iPhone 8 in spots number three and four. At number nine, the iPhone X is at the bottom of the list, but only a few points separate all of the devices tested.

Article Link: Consumer Reports Ranks iPhone X Below iPhone 8 Because of Durability and Battery Life
Click to expand...

I'd rank it below the 7 or 6s plus as far as battery life on 10.3.3 and break ability as well... I get nearly 2 days battery from my 6S plus
 
I have always found Consumer Reports to be reliable. I trust their findings and comparisons.

I also understand that a new phone with a larger screen and faster processor will eat more battery. Though I would take note of it, it would be only 1 factor in my decision making. A much larger factor might be "Holy Cow! Look at that SCREEN!"
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cloudkicker
fokmik said:
"Consumer Reports also had some complaints about the iPhone X battery life, which does not last as long as the battery in Samsung phones like the Galaxy S8."

Really??? My S8 i never got more than 5.35 min battery usage, my iphone X i never got under 7 hours (100% -10%)
Click to expand...
They obviously are using a brand new phone out of the box for the Samsung.

As the file system and app space gets filled up, battery life exponentially degrades to really unacceptable levels in Android.

One of the main things I couldn’t stand about my S4 and S7 Edge...
 
cyberddot said:
No really, in most respects durability can be tested, and averaging those variables applied to a sample group is how tests are performed.
Click to expand...

But some of these tests are not indicative of real world experience on what would happen to an iPhone based on how it was dropped, angle, surface type, etc. every single scenario will vary in there so many variables as I mentioned before, that these tests are good measurement, but they don't exclude all the other possibilities that can happen.
 
I have been very careful with my devices over the years and have kept them in cases. None have broken but have dropped them on occasion. Because i do not want to be wasteful of my hard earned money, i will avoid buying a device that has glass on both sides of it. I have not had any difficulty plugging in my device for charging, so i do not need to risk my money buying a fragile device with the unused feature wireless charging (the proclaimed reason for a glass back).
Apple executives have learned the Apple customers want a nice looking device with all these features, and will gladly go in to debt to buy a replacement if/when it breaks. And that new purchase will just feed into the profits and bonuses those Apple executives take home (and that is what it really is all about).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Martyimac
kre62 said:
I find myself disagreeing with CR more and more over the years, but have to agree here. The 8+ is the best phone Apple has out this year. Maybe next year they will nail the X.
Click to expand...

Whatever helps you sleep at night :)
 
My X battery life is fantastic.

All mondern smartphones use glass...it breaks. Be careful. This isn't an iPhone X problem.
 
jasonklee said:
Why I personally have disavowed CR's credibility, per Wirecutter's coffee maker review:



CR has been completely useless to me in the past and continues to be irrelevant.
Click to expand...
Do you realize that you are doing the exact same thing you are complaining about? Not only that, but you're actually doing worse by taking a complaint about a review of an entirely different product and conflating it with CR's review of the X. You are not complaining about CR's methodology for testing phones, which might have some validity. You are complaining about their methodology of testing coffee makers and trying to draw a comparison to their phone testing.

In the immortal words of Beatrice's friend, "that's not how it works, that's not how any of this works".:D
 
  • Like
Reactions: sinsin07
It's flimsy and the battery life isn't as good as a couple of other phones, and it costs a lot. Get over it.
 
barkomatic said:
Oh come on, why the angry reaction to a magazine that dares to rate the iPhone X as anything less than the best smartphone in history? It's been demonstrated over and over again that the iPhone X is relatively easy to damage.
Click to expand...

The iphone 8/8+ is just as easy to damage.
 
Gaprofitt said:
Nonsense. Durability can easily be tested..
Click to expand...
You understand that even in controlled drops the phone doesn’t hit the exact spot they want it to. Things will always be off by some small amount. Which can cause different things to happen.
 
CR is not my go to reference for overall cell phone evaluation but it is one resource. Mix that in with reviews whose primary subject is technology and I get varying view points which, when all mixed together, point me in a certain direction. Has worked for many years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ravenstar
Relentless Power said:
Durability is completely subjective. That's based on how someone treats their device and what type of protection they use. Every iPhone will react differently to a drop based on angle and impact.
Click to expand...

Gaprofitt said:
Nonsense. Durability can easily be tested..
Click to expand...
This is true, but....
Relentless Power said:
In some respects, It can completely be overblown towards what's considered durable based on how the test is subjective. But your ultimately it's depending on what the user is using for protection and the results of the test. They're are too many variables what can happen to a phone in general when it comes to breaking it and they all scenarios in general can't be tested.
Click to expand...
Durability can be tested objectively, but the weight that it is given in an overall subjective.

If a user plans on using a case, or has a habit of babying their phones, then that user would feel that the weight given to the total score would be too high. If someone needs a very durable phone, then the weight given would be too low for them.

I am not going to bash CR for how the prioritize ratings, but just say that they have to pick something.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cyberddot
Relentless Power said:
Durability is completely subjective. That's based on how someone treats their device and what type of protection they use. Every iPhone will react differently to a drop based on angle and impact.
Click to expand...
No, Durability is NOT SUBJECTIVE.
You can measure, quantify and objectively state PRECISELY what you are doing, as anyone involved in testing knows. These are not randomly shuffled into a bag and pulled out. Each phone is subjected to the same test (whether it's shock, temperature, vibration or dropping). The test is measured, quantified, and statistically validated to ensure that it's accurate. I have the iPhone X, it's a great performer. I have no issue with the battery life, but I haven't compared it against the iPhone 8 or 8 Plus; I can say that it's much better than my old iPhone 6 in every category. However, as Apple will point out at your point of sales, replacing a cracked back on the iPhone is a $500+ proposition, and AppleCare is $200. So, yes; the iPhone X is most certainly less durable than the iPhone 8. Aluminum can take a lot more abuse than glass will.
 
  • Like
Reactions: john123 and DUIduckSAUCE
Scottsoapbox said:
2.5' drop test is much more reasonable than the 6' ones. You will generally drop a phone at waist or table or elbow (half raised) level not head level. Still that would put it closer to 3-4'.
The 50-100 times seems excessive though, anyone dropping a phone that much would have a (serious) case.
5-10 drops from 3-4' on a hard indoor surface seems the most "real world".
Click to expand...
i live and work in a big city with lots of foot traffic and see a large number of individuals of all ages walking around with the phones in their hands either talking on them, flicking their fingers on them, or just holding them. i have also seen a number stumble on sidewalks, drop the devices and then yell "F%^K" after picking the devices. Just since you (and I) are careful with these $800+ devices does not mean many others are careful. So the tests the CR staff conducted are reasonable.
The reality is that Apple executives decided to go with a design that will crack and break and will need to be replaced.
And those replacements will mean more money funding Apple executive bonuses (and that is the goal of every business decision).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back