Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
It's a reasonable assumption if the black on some iP5 is rubbing off like crazy with normal wiping/handling in an extremely short period of time whereas other iPhone 5 (like mine) look as good as on day one. The latter argues against not using enough black coating across the board.



You mean like Jobs's "You're holding it wrong" comment?



They don't earn so little. $2 per hour over there is not $2 around here.

I am not sure why you are arguing with me. I am agreeing with you that there is a manufacturing or design defect in the coating used.

All I am saying is that Apple is refusing to deal with it appropriately (recall/issue a re-spec) and they are sweeping it under the rug like antennagate.

The new strike should indicate that they did re-spec manufacturing quality control. The workers complaining that "they are not trained" indicates more than a "be more careful" order is being issued. It's more likely an increase in coating or some change in the manufacturing process.

I am willing to bet that newer iphones coming out after this initial production run will have a modified manufacturing process.
 
I can't get past the fact that I own anodized aluminum flashlights that bang about in a toolkit and are none the worse for wear. And Apple furnishes a phone that is either worn from the start, or soon wears, and people say that it is expected.

I cant get past the fact that you think the high grade aluminum flashlights that are machined from a high-strength aerospace-grade alloy, making them extremely resistant to damage from impact, crushing, or bending is the same process used on a cellphone:D
Really?
You're going to use your smartphone in the same way as a rugged heavy duty flashlight?
 
I cant get past the fact that you think the high grade aluminum flashlights that are machined from a high-strength aerospace-grade alloy, making them extremely resistant to damage from impact, crushing, or bending is the same process used on a cellphone:D
Really?
You're going to use your smartphone in the same way as a rugged heavy duty flashlight?

You seem to be in every thread lamb blasting everyone who says that the aluminum can be better protected. Are you an Apple loyalist?
 
You seem to be in every thread lamb blasting everyone who says that the aluminum can be better protected. Are you an Apple loyalist?

Lol :D
Yes, Im the person responsible for the paint process:D
Im just saying, maybe some people have really high/weird expectations for that tiny metal band on a smartphone.
I just dont expect it to be what some expect it to be and think that it will never scratch or wear off.
Maybe Im crazy.
Maybe we should be able to hammer nails with it:D
 
I cant get past the fact that you think the high grade aluminum flashlights that are machined from a high-strength aerospace-grade alloy, making them extremely resistant to damage from impact, crushing, or bending is the same process used on a cellphone:D
Really?
You're going to use your smartphone in the same way as a rugged heavy duty flashlight?

It should be the same alloy and level of anodize on a device that most carry and use more often than a flashlight. So far, though, I'm having reception trouble trying to make a call from my flashlight. :)
 
I am not sure why you are arguing with me. I am agreeing with you that there is a manufacturing or design defect in the coating used.

All I am saying is that Apple is refusing to deal with it appropriately (recall/issue a re-spec) and they are sweeping it under the rug like antennagate.

But that's not the correct way of looking at it. Schiller was talking about scuffing being normal on the metal body and he's 100% correct (I even have scuffing on my original iPhone to prove it). However, he wasn't responding to defective anodizing coating and only a batch of them actually have defective anodizing coating. It's not a case of Apple refusing to deal with it appropriately and they're certainly not sweeping it under the rug as evidenced by their trying to impose stricter QC demands.
 
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
It should be the same alloy and level of anodize on a device that most carry and use more often than a flashlight. So far, though, I'm having reception trouble trying to make a call from my flashlight. :)

Lol :D
I agree, it should be the same process but we all know that Apple didnt go anywhere near as far as those flashlight companies go for the coating on their products.
Those lights can take a huge beating and will look like new still after years of use.
The iphone one little drop on the tile floor and forget it:D
 
I can't get past the fact that I own anodized aluminum flashlights that bang about in a toolkit and are none the worse for wear. And Apple furnishes a phone that is either worn from the start, or soon wears, and people say that it is expected.

Newsflash, Anodized aluminum scratches and scuffs when scratched or scuffed.

7405966372_6be2269a43.jpg

1222294imgwq5.jpg
 
But that's not the correct way of looking at it. Schiller was talking about scuffing being normal on the metal body and he's 100% correct (I even have scuffing on my original iPhone to prove it). However, he wasn't responding to defective anodizing coating and only a batch of them actually have defective anodizing coating. It's not a case of Apple refusing to deal with it appropriately and they're certainly not sweeping it under the rug as evidenced by their trying to impose stricter QC demands.

lol. keep believing whatever you want.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.