New Video Demonstrates How iPhone 7 Fares in Deep Water

[MacRumors]

YouTube channel EverythingApplePro posted a video over the weekend demonstrating how the iPhone 7 fares in an extreme deep water test. The video, titled "How Deep Before it Dies?", shows an iPhone 7 and a Samsung Galaxy S7 being lowered into the ocean at increasingly lower depths.

Apple's iPhone 7 series is certified to IP67 standard water resistance, which means the handsets are built to withstand being submerged in up to 1 meter (about 3.28 feet) of water for half an hour at most. Samsung's handset carries the higher IP68 certification, indicating it can withstand continuous immersion in over 1 meter (3.28 feet) depths, or up to five feet, according to Samsung.

The first test drops the devices down 5 feet, exceeding the 3.28 feet rating that IP67 standard promises. Both devices emerge from the water undamaged. Then the devices are dropped at increasingly deeper intervals in 5 feet increments.

At 20 feet, with no signs of damage, the tester adds another 10 feet. The first signs of damage become evident at 30 feet of water for five minutes. The Galaxy begins sporadically rebooting, while the iPhone's Taptic Engine-based capacitive home button begins malfunctioning.

After 35 feet water immersion, the Galaxy's display refuses to come on, but the iPhone 7 continues to power up and the touchscreen still responds to touches, despite obvious water damage under the bottom half of the display.

Notwithstanding the highly unconventional and extreme nature of the test, it does serve to underline Apple's continuing strategy of being conservative in its waterproofing claims. The first Apple Watch for example was only rated for up to 1 meter of water depth, but regularly survived dives down to 40 meters in swimming tests.

Article Link: New Video Demonstrates How iPhone 7 Fares in Deep Water

 

[freediverx]

What's the point of going directly from 3 feet to 30? Morons.

 

[Gooberton]

I question the validity of this video, you can't tell how deep it really is. Ohhhhh and I won't have an iPhone till November please make the Best Buy thread sticky so I can find it
[doublepost=1474280628][/doublepost]

What's the point of going directly from 3 feet to 30? Morons.

You didn't even watch the video, lol. You people crack me up

 

[keysofanxiety]

Good ol' Apple. What a rugged phone they've built here. As you said, they're conservative with their claims. Interesting how difficult it is to liquid damage this phone.

It's similar to when people were getting 16 hours battery life from their MacBook Air, whilst Apple would claim 'up to 12 hours'. With every other manufacturer, 'up to' means absolutely nothing.

 

[5105973]

Lol, if it turns out the IPhone is more water resistant because Apple removed the headphone jack, I will have to eat some serious crow. (See my current signature )

 

[Surreal]

What's the point of going directly from 3 feet to 30? Morons.

You didn't read the article or watch the video. 5 feet increments to begin with.

 

[SvenSvenson]

What's the point of going directly from 3 feet to 30? Morons.

"Then the devices are dropped at increasingly deeper intervals in 5 feet increments." Nice to see comprehension skills on the internet haven't altered.

 

[SethBoy]

“But, but… IP68 > IP67”

 

[Kajje]

Would be interesting if somebody dares to take an iPhone for a scuba dive. Surviving temporary pressure is one, surviving button presses is a complete different story.

And as there is plenty of people wanting to drown these babies let's see who gets narced first, the phone or the diver.

 

[macfacts]

I'm curious if the water damage strip was activated?

 

[Seoras]

It's all about The Brand. "being conservative", is protecting the brand.
Rushing it out the door, cramming a battery in a space too small, is ignoring your brand reputation and taking a cheap shot at glory in numbers.

 

[Abazigal]

“But, but… IP68 > IP67”

Seems Apple is deliberately being ultra-conservative with their claims here. Can't blame them. Better safe than sorry. You want to ensure your phone remains waterproof regardless of what abuse it gets put through after 2 years and I don't think anyone can fault Apple for literally giving you more than what was promised here.

 

[44267547]

Good ol' Apple. What a rugged phone they've built here. As you said, they're conservative with their claims. Interesting how difficult it is to liquid damage this phone.

It's similar to when people were getting 16 hours battery life from their MacBook Air, whilst Apple would claim 'up to 12 hours'. With every other manufacturer, 'up to' means absolutely nothing.

Similar to the 6s was not rated for being water resistant, yet tests showed how water resistant it was. The 6s used a lot More adhesive to hold hardware together, creating tighter restrictions. Their were tests showing the 6s being submerged for a minute without suffering any water damage.

 

[iMember]

Again! Note 7 it's the newer model!

 

[576316]

Will stuff like salt water and chlorine have a worse effect on the phones than just clean water? I imagine the water in that river would have been salty.

 

[MH01]

This test is pointless.

Both phones failed at 30 metres. iPhone is not more water resistant than the galaxy in this test, when the device completely dies has nothing to do with water resistance.

All they had to do is dunk both phones in less than a metre for 30 min and over a meter for 30 min.

The correct way to test is to meet each IP rating and keep going up.

How are people concluding that apple is conservative, when the conditions of IP67 were not met??

 

[Mac Fly (film)]

And...

wait for it...

wait for it...

wait for it...

it doesn't explode.

 

[Kajje]

It used to be trivial to claim warranty for a water damaged phone a.k.a. "Water damage? Impossible Sir. It never got wet, maybe just maybe I just left it one time for one minute in a slightly damp bathroom"

Good luck with filling that warranty form, Youtuber!

 

[fitshaced]

Yeah that pretty much sums it up. Samsung throw spec at hardware and believe it to be better. Marketing the best possible numbers. Apple tend to take the safer approach and rate conservatively. Better customer experience to under promise and over deliver.

 

[keysofanxiety]

And...

wait for it...

wait for it...

wait for it...

it doesn't explode.

Meanwhile, at Samsung's underwater testing facility:

 

[BrodieApple]

iPhone wins despite lower rating!

 

[applesith]

I know the can had a hole in it to fill with water, but does that interfere with the actual water pressure being applied to the phones?

I'm not familiar with this stuff, but it seems the can would take a lot of the water pressure first before the phones are exposed to it. Would this be the same as just weighting the phones from below and having them fully exposed to the water without a can around them?

 

[djcerla]

A tale of two company cultures.

 

[chr1s60]

Obviously Apple isn't going to go claiming their phone can withstand the pressure from 10ft or more so people will run out and think they can go do every water sport they like with their phone on them. Just because one phone withstood it doesn't mean others will or that any should!

 

[gnasher729]

Seems Apple is deliberately being ultra-conservative with their claims here. Can't blame them. Better safe than sorry. You want to ensure your phone remains waterproof regardless of what abuse it gets put through after 2 years and I don't think anyone can fault Apple for literally giving you more than what was promised here.

And everybody who considers doing their own experiments in the shower: Water damage is _not_ covered by warranty. Apple has done work to make water damage less likely (and according to iFixit there are some changes in that direction in the iPhone 6 already), they got an official certification (for the iPhone 7, not for the iPhone 6), but water damage is _not_ covered by warranty.

Since people compare Apple and Samsung: Whatever phone you have, don't put it into water. If it gets wet and survives be happy that you were lucky.