iphone 7 Water resist.... I am verry verry disapointed

[Applejuiced]

Not really because the point of the OP thread was about Apple misleading people with there ads/keynote claims.

You've just decided to focus on something that is not at all what the OP is actually about.

Focus on what? Oh their policy about the particular topic?
Imagine that. Assuming whatever and then finding out about their real documented policy about water damage is not very bright.

[doublepost=1481423561][/doublepost]

What is your point with this info? Are you saying that since other companies use manipulation in their ads that it is also okay for Apple to do so?

I think many people here are saying they expect more from Apple

They can expect whatever they want.
If you don't like their policy sue them or buy something else.
Simple.
[doublepost=1481423641][/doublepost]

Clearly many people feel they were

They'll get over it and will figure out what the policy is.
[doublepost=1481423772][/doublepost]

You're missing the point completely.

Your point is pointless actually

 

[Andrewtst]

You're missing the point completely.

You the one missing the point. Also the OP not even dare to mention how long his son deep the phone in the water.

 

[I7guy]

What is your point with this info? Are you saying that since other companies use manipulation in their ads that it is also okay for Apple to do so?

I think many people here are saying they expect more from Apple

An ip67 does not guarantee waterproofing. The reason for the information is that Samsung advertises something they clearly don't warranty. Waterproofing actually saves money for the customer and manufacturer is that it protects against common accidents. Apple never claimed you could go swimming with it. And I never walked away from the commercial thinking I was going deep-sea scuba diving with my iphone 7.

It also doesn't mean there would not be instances of water ingress despite the rating.

For your deep water enjoyment, in case you missed the earlier post that had this video.

[doublepost=1481428305][/doublepost]

Focus on what? Oh their policy about the particular topic?
Imagine that. Assuming whatever and then finding out about their real documented policy about water damage is not very bright.

[doublepost=1481423561][/doublepost]

They can expect whatever they want.
If you don't like their policy sue them or buy something else.
Simple.
[doublepost=1481423641][/doublepost]

They'll get over it and will figure out what the policy is.
[doublepost=1481423772][/doublepost]

Your point is pointless actually

While I feel for the OP, as I said above, my feeling is that waterproofing benefits both parties.

Maybe apple could have been more lenient, as I wasn't there I couldn't say.

But to me it's similar to saying, the screen is made from gorilla glass, virtually unbreakable...except when it's not.

 

[jlczl]

It's a simple thing really. Water damage warranty or lack of it should be made just as clear as water resistance features are highlighted in commercials by all parties.

 

[Radon87000]

An ip67 does not guarantee waterproofing. The reason for the information is that Samsung advertises something they clearly don't warranty. Waterproofing actually saves money for the customer and manufacturer is that it protects against common accidents. Apple never claimed you could go swimming with it. And I never walked away from the commercial thinking I was going deep-sea scuba diving with my iphone 7.

It also doesn't mean there would not be instances of water ingress despite the rating.

For your deep water enjoyment, in case you missed the earlier post that had this video.

[doublepost=1481428305][/doublepost]
While I feel for the OP, as I said above, my feeling is that waterproofing benefits both parties.

Maybe apple could have been more lenient, as I wasn't there I couldn't say.

But to me it's similar to saying, the screen is made from gorilla glass, virtually unbreakable...except when it's not.

Why do you keep posting that video? You are trusting the results of an YouTube channel of an Apple fan instead of the independent professionals who gave the IP rating?Not to mention the test isnt fair as the Galaxy has extra entry points for water due to the home button and the head phone jack and yet managed till 35 feet

 

[Applejuiced]

Why do you keep posting that video? You are trusting the results of an YouTube channel of an Apple fan instead of the independent professionals who gave the IP rating?Not to mention the test isnt fair as the Galaxy has extra entry points for water due to the home button and the head phone jack and yet managed till 35 feet

How is it not fair when the galaxy has received a higher IP rating than the iPhone and performs poorly and worst than a lower IP rated device? Wouldn't that be "unfair" towards the iPhone? So now you're trying to say that the video is fake or Apple fan biased?

 

[Radon87000]

How is it not fair when the galaxy has received a higher IP rating than the iPhone and performs poorly and worst than a lower IP rated device? So now you're trying to say that the video is fake or Apple fan biased?

The bolded is what I am contesting.We dont know what he did in the 15 minutes.He could have removed the iPhone and let the Galaxy stay in water for longer.We dont have proof that this test wasnt rigged. Its an Apple channel .So I take his words with a grain of salt

Isnt the rating subjective?Remove the jack and the home button on the S7,let it keep the same rating and it will survive for a longer duration

 

[Applejuiced]

The bolded is what I am contesting.Firstly,we dont know what he did in the 15 minutes.He could have removed the iPhone and let the Galaxy stay in water for longer.We dont have proof that this test wasnt rigged. Its an Apple channel .So I take his words with a grain of salt

Isnt the rating subjective?Remove the jack and the home button on the S7,let it keep the same rating and it will survive for a longer duration

So you think he doctored the video?
The rating is the rating.
It withstands more water than the lower rated device. It's not subjective, it's a certified standard.

 

[Radon87000]

So you think he doctored the video?

Its a possibility that cant be ruled out. Had it been an Android channel I would have believed it

It withstands more water than the lower rated device. It's not subjective, it's a certified standard.

Yes but the point is that 2 devices can have the same rating and its possible for one device to die and the other to survive because of simple physics

 

[Applejuiced]

Its a possibility that cant be ruled out


Yes but the point is that 2 devices can have the same rating and its possible for one device to die and the other to survive because of simple physics

The devices are put through the same tests and standards.
And yes physics and many other things can come in to play. Also the rating is not permanent. When the device is brand new it is at its highest resistance form. The older it gets and with more wear and use the resistance, gaskets and seals get loose and wear out. The water resistance will be different on any device within the 1st week of use and 11 months later for example. Another reason why manufacturers cannot guarantee or stand behind financially such water resistance claims. They are certified under optimal conditions in isolated lab tests.

 

[I7guy]

Why do you keep posting that video? You are trusting the results of an YouTube channel of an Apple fan instead of the independent professionals who gave the IP rating?Not to mention the test isnt fair as the Galaxy has extra entry points for water due to the home button and the head phone jack and yet managed till 35 feet

1. Apple only went for an ip67 rating, the easiest rating even though it is patently obvious the iPhone is more sturdily constructed.
2. Seems the construction of the iPhone 7 is better than the galaxy s7 with the higher approval rating.
3. Whether the test is fair or you trust the review is irrelevant to the outcome of the test.(as has been goalies i past posts by all parties commenting on the veracity of Youtube videos)
4. We don't really know what, why, how or when occurred to the original op just the complaint.

 

[KillaMac]

The devices are put through the same tests and standards.
And yes physics and many other things can come in to play. Also the rating is not permanent. When the device is brand new it is at its highest resistance form. The older it gets and with more wear and use the resistance, gaskets and seals get loose and wear out. The water resistance will be different on any device within the 1st week of use and 11 months later for example. Another reason why manufacturers cannot guarantee or stand behind financially such water resistance claims. They are certified under optimal conditions in isolated lab tests.

Actually no they aren't. The manufacture can select what test they choose to use for their phone. Doesn't mean it can't handle more.

 

[I7guy]

Its a possibility that cant be ruled out. Had it been an Android channel I would have believed it


Yes but the point is that 2 devices can have the same rating and its possible for one device to die and the other to survive because of simple physics

The veracity of all Youtube videos could really be called into account.

An ip68 rating does not mean, as we saw, better waterproofing than an ip67 device.

 

[C DM]

The veracity of all Youtube videos could really be called into account.

An ip68 rating does not mean, as we saw, better waterproofing than an ip67 device.

Come on, the videos about dropped frame rates that clearly show everyone has problems with their iOS devices are de facto proof and 100% unquestionable and unbiased reality. It's just those that show that an Apple device is better in some way (or a Samsung device is worse in some way) that are really questionable and can't really be trusted.

 

[Radon87000]

The veracity of all Youtube videos could really be called into account.

Come on, the videos about dropped frame rates that clearly show everyone has problems with their iOS devices are de facto proof and 100% unquestionable and unbiased reality. It's just those that show that an Apple device is better in some way (or a Samsung device is worse in some way) that are really questionable and can't really be trusted.

You guys should read my post above again.I very clearly stated I doubt this video because its been uploaded by an Apple fan channel . Had this same video been posted by an unbiased source like the ones I use for the fps drops which are users like us then this video would have been more trustworthy

An ip68 rating does not mean, as we saw, better waterproofing than an ip67 device.

Where?Can you show me an unbiased source which is neither an Apple or Android channel. Who knows? This guy could have easily removed the iPhone the second the video recording was paused and put it back in at the 14th minute before resuming

In absence of an unbiased video ip68>ip67
[doublepost=1481480012][/doublepost]

1. Apple only went for an ip67 rating, the easiest rating even though it is patently obvious the iPhone is more sturdily constructed.

Or maybe it has lesser entry points like no headphone jack and no home button and has nothing to do with construction quality

2. Seems the construction of the iPhone 7 is better than the galaxy s7 with the higher approval rating.

No.See above.Again an Apple fan channel

3. Whether the test is fair or you trust the review is irrelevant to the outcome of the test.(as has been goalies i past posts by all parties commenting on the veracity of Youtube videos)
4. We don't really know what, why, how or when occurred to the original op just the complaint.

Its not about trust.Testing should be done by an independant source not biased in some way.This is the basic premise of a test. "EverythingApplePro" as evidenced by the channel name is clearly an unbiased source

 

[lordofthereef]

I gave one it two examples earlier in the thread. I'm still waiting on the call back I was promised on Monday. I went in today to check (I had to go into tmobile anyway as it's in the same mall as apple) and they had the batteries I was waiting to get a call for. Of course I didn't have the phone (moms phone) with me. They couldn't really tell me why I didn't get a call. I guess we will see if they have them tomorrow evening.

It's a minor thing, but based on my previous experiences I've always been in and out and not had to "work" to get anything fixed. I even mentioned that a potential fix for this would be a better booking system considering eligibility is (and was in my case) checked with the online tool Apple provided. Ironic that the reason I was in the mall in the first place is to fix another tmobile screw up to my account lol.

Anyway, I made my statements because I've felt Apple was always top of class. They still are, but they've backed off a bit in my eyes. If they're as great as they've ever been for you, that's awesome. There are various other points I could make like out of warranty repair costs going up steeply, Apple care costs raising, etc but that's probably not fornthis thread either. At the end of the day I'm not trying to change any minds here. Just sharing my thoughts and experiences. And I feel apple's service isn't what it was four or five years ago.

Responding to my own post here since it's a continuation... perhaps not in the correct thread but I started here so i figured I would finish.

I went in the following day (Thursday) to get the battery swap. They said I could just drop it off since I had some other shopping to do. I came back in an hour and it was done.

I got a phone call yesterday (Saturday) to set an appointment up. I told them I already came in and had it done. And that was that.

Strange they called me anyway. And almost a week later than expected. But anyway, figured the right thing was mentioning I did get the phone fixed AND got a phone call, though perhaps not in the order I'd have liked.

Also, my two cents on the car analogies, I personally wouldn't trust a car to brake for me. And that's because I have a lot more to lose than a busted phone if it doesn't work. I can sorta kinda maybe sue if my phone busts. Not quite the same when I am dead on the road lol. I have seen the ads that people are referring to and I think they are misleading. IIRC some European country is actually suing and/or pushing for the verbiage on automation to be changed since it is, indeed, misleading. I do not believe that the end user should have to look through pages and pages of documentation to fully understand what is promised/implied. Anyway, I am walking away from the dead horse

 

[I7guy]

You guys should read my post above again.I very clearly stated I doubt this video because its been uploaded by an Apple fan channel . Had this same video been posted by an unbiased source like the ones I use for the fps drops which are users like us then this video would have been more trustworthy


Where?Can you show me an unbiased source which is neither an Apple or Android channel. Who knows? This guy could have easily removed the iPhone the second the video recording was paused and put it back in at the 14th minute before resuming

In absence of an unbiased video ip68>ip67
[doublepost=1481480012][/doublepost]
Or maybe it has lesser entry points like no headphone jack and no home button and has nothing to do with construction quality


No.See above.Again an Apple fan channel

Its not about trust.Testing should be done by an independant source not biased in some way.This is the basic premise of a test. "EverythingApplePro" as evidenced by the channel name is clearly an unbiased source

You are welcome to trust whoever an whomever you want and base your conclusions on whatever opinion you have of trustworthy source. Independent does not equal "the truth".

However to me they are an independent source, not linked to either Apple or Samsung. Apple in the name does not imply bias. But as @C DM said above, seems if this same channel were a android based review channel, it would be trustworthy. I agree ip68 specs beat ip67 specs, but this video clearly shows iphone 7 waterproofing construction > samsung s7 waterproofing construction; for whatever the reason.

 

[macfacts]

regardless of what you think, its never smart to have electronic devices near any liquid. no matter if its water resistant or waterproof. they clearly state that its water resistant. and their warranty does not cover it if you actually read it, Samsung does the same thing even with their s7 active with has a higher water resistant rating.

I would have thought people would want or expect Apple to be better than Samsung. This isn't a race to the bottom.

 

[C DM]

You guys should read my post above again.I very clearly stated I doubt this video because its been uploaded by an Apple fan channel . Had this same video been posted by an unbiased source like the ones I use for the fps drops which are users like us then this video would have been more trustworthy


Where?Can you show me an unbiased source which is neither an Apple or Android channel. Who knows? This guy could have easily removed the iPhone the second the video recording was paused and put it back in at the 14th minute before resuming

In absence of an unbiased video ip68>ip67
[doublepost=1481480012][/doublepost]
Or maybe it has lesser entry points like no headphone jack and no home button and has nothing to do with construction quality


No.See above.Again an Apple fan channel

Its not about trust.Testing should be done by an independant source not biased in some way.This is the basic premise of a test. "EverythingApplePro" as evidenced by the channel name is clearly an unbiased source

Saying sources are unbiased or biased based on whether or not you agree with them or you like them doesn't make them so. As usual, it's not really how things work. But, also as usual, it's certainly more convenient and simpler to just go with those assumptions and treat them as given reality.

 

[KillaMac]

Its not about trust.Testing should be done by an independant source not biased in some way.This is the basic premise of a test. "EverythingApplePro" as evidenced by the channel name is clearly an unbiased source

And you aren't? You have mad it very obvious in all your posts here what side you are on.

 

[Radon87000]

You are welcome to trust whoever an whomever you want and base your conclusions on whatever opinion you have of trustworthy source. Independent does not equal "the truth".

However to me they are an independent source, not linked to either Apple or Samsung. Apple in the name does not imply bias. But as @C DM said above, seems if this same channel were a android based review channel, it would be trustworthy. I agree ip68 specs beat ip67 specs, but this video clearly shows iphone 7 waterproofing construction > samsung s7 waterproofing construction; for whatever the reason.

Saying sources are unbiased or biased based on whether or not you agree with them or you like them doesn't make them so. As usual, it's not really how things work. But, also as usual, it's certainly more convenient and simpler to just go with those assumptions and treat them as given reality.

Trusting results of an Apple vs Samsung test done by an Apple fanboy is equivalent to trusting the benchmark results a company does of its own products against its competitors and publishes them .

I remember when the Note 7 came out with their own marketing camera materials on how it beat the iPhone camera these very same people where insinuating "Its marketing" "We don't know why settings were used" etc but all of a sudden when an Apple fan channel does it , its the holy grail of benchmarking and the most trustworthy source out there

An Apple site is not a testing gospel for Apple vs Samsung. Show me tomshardware,arstrchnica, even Anandtech and the results would at least be believable

Now you are free to believe these results . Just don't go around stating these as facts which you are doing


Yes an Android channel is biased towards Samsung and so them showing Apple winning is trustworthy. This is why I always visit Android sites to see shortcomings of Apple products and vice versa

And you aren't? You have mad it very obvious in all your posts here what side you are on.

What I prefer has nothing to do with this discussion . But since You asked I like both iOS and Android. Maybe I prefer Android slightly more

 

[I7guy]

Trusting results of an Apple vs Samsung test done by an Apple fanboy is equivalent to trusting the benchmark results a company does of its own products against its competitors and publishes them .

I remember when the Note 7 came out with their own marketing camera materials on how it beat the iPhone camera these very same people where insinuating "Its marketing" "We don't know why settings were used" etc but all of a sudden when an Apple fan channel does it , its the holy grail of benchmarking and the most trustworthy source out there

An Apple site is not a testing gospel for Apple vs Samsung. Show me tomshardware,arstrchnica, even Anandtech and the results would at least be believable

Now you are free to believe these results . Just don't go around stating these as facts which you are doing


What I prefer has nothing to do with this discussion . But since You asked I like both iOS and Android. Maybe I prefer Android slightly more

As I said, you can trust whoever or whom ever you want. That is not a factor in my opinion of what was posted earlier. This is not marketing, an independent review came up with the results. It's good enough for me as some other Youtube reviews showing performance or frame drops are good enough for you....as was noted.

It's good enough for me to state this as a fact and it can be "proven".

 

[C DM]

Trusting results of an Apple vs Samsung test done by an Apple fanboy is equivalent to trusting the benchmark results a company does of its own products against its competitors and publishes them .

I remember when the Note 7 came out with their own marketing camera materials on how it beat the iPhone camera these very same people where insinuating "Its marketing" "We don't know why settings were used" etc but all of a sudden when an Apple fan channel does it , its the holy grail of benchmarking and the most trustworthy source out there

An Apple site is not a testing gospel for Apple vs Samsung. Show me tomshardware,arstrchnica, even Anandtech and the results would at least be believable

Now you are free to believe these results . Just don't go around stating these as facts which you are doing


What I prefer has nothing to do with this discussion . But since You asked I like both iOS and Android. Maybe I prefer Android slightly more

You mean like others have been doing all along with some sort of lags and this and that? (Rhetorical question)

 

[Radon87000]

As I said, you can trust whoever or whom ever you want. That is not a factor in my opinion of what was posted earlier. This is not marketing, an independent review came up with the results. It's good enough for me as some other Youtube reviews showing performance or frame drops are good enough for you....as was noted.

It's good enough for me to state this as a fact and it can be "proven".

This test is not independent as an Apple fanboy did it

The fps drops were not from Apple fan channels and even if they were then they are more trustworthy as Apple fan channels showing shortcomings of Apple products must definitely be true

It's not a fact till you show me a independent source. The facts are , this guy is a hardcore Apple fanboy(dude spent 300 dollars on that Apple book . Holy ****) , and trusting his results is like a company auditing its own accounts.

 

[I7guy]

This test is not independent as an Apple fanboy did it

The fps drops were not from Apple fan channels and even if they were then they are more trustworthy as Apple fan channels showing shortcomings of Apple products must definitely be true

It's not a fact till you show me a independent source. The facts are , this guy is a hardcore Apple fanboy(dude spent 300 dollars on that Apple book . Holy ****) , and trusting his results is like a company auditing its own accounts.

It's independent and good enough for me to call it a "fact" in the same way prior citations have been used to "prove" things. You are free to cite and believe your own sources.