Oh okay Rolex's...thought we were talking about smartphones here and not and not Rolex's. Irrelevant to what I said, no smartphone manufacturer covers water damage on their IP rated device. Simple logic behind this is that people would abuse the crap out of it and yeah..
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Next iPhone Said to Have Even Better IP68-Rated Water Resistance
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Rolex does not produce smartphones.
This thread is about smartphones.
There are waterproof technologies out there. It's left-field to start throwing them into the argument to substantiate the crazy going on here already. Many are making the opposite claim though -- like myself -- that GoPro is a company that shows water videos all the time, but yet doesn't cover their cameras from water damage except through purchased plans, much like Applecare.
The statement to refute here is: what smartphone company offers a water-resistant phone, with water damage covered by warranty?
I can see people being upset by the headphone jack removal as something was taken away, but adding water resistance and having people complain? Odd.
Seemingly didn't read what I wrote huh.
So, waterproofing a mass produced car and waterproofing a one off metal can, which one's the hardest?
Being able to do the first one would be meh once the second one is done according to you.
Innovation relates to IMPLEMENTATION, it's scale, costs, efficiency and what it actually relates to.
No wonder the patent office is so crapped up with people who think like you probably running it.
So you agreee that Apple didn't innovate by making a water resistant phone since it was already done by others before Apple.
Apple could give away free hardware and someone would find something wrong with why Apple is being generous. Then again, it's Macrumors.
What was in your post was hyperbole, my response is something more germane to the discussion. And yes, that is exactly my thinking, you are free to agree/disagree, don't care either way.
You can have your definition of innovation, but here is a common one.
- the introduction of something new
- a new idea, method, or device
A new idea, is water proofing (water resistance) as new idea? No it wasn't. Maybe an innovation would be a new method of adding water resistance, but the concept itself isn't innovative.
I'm not complaining about water resistance. I am saying if you are going to highlight a feature it needs to be relatively new and/or better than what your competitors have. IP67 is not better, and 3 years after other manufacturers released their water resistant versions is not recent. There are lots of of things that Apple could highlight about their phones that are either unique or improved. Focus on those.
Last edited:
This is exactly the type of thing Apple should highlight. Not only is it better but it's a lot better.
I have used my iPod 4th Gen, iPod Touch 1st Gen, iPhone 3GS, iPhone 5 and iPhone 6s in light rain since I can know it, and I've never had a single issue. Under heavy rain, even with a spec, I wouldn't get it out. Water on a multi-touch screen makes it unusable at the moment anyways...
Airbags ARE a good comparison, because just like airbags, I don't see a waterproof specification as "encouraging people to try it out", I see it as "if a bad luck happens to me, it might have chances to make it through the day". If it DOES encourage some people to try it in extreme situations, then I totally see why Apple charges people if it breaks and I respect their stance.
In the end, it's all about common sense, which... not everybody has in this world, unfortunately.
When the company selling the product shows people using it in the rain and right next to a pool there is a reasonable assumption that they are pushing how waterproof it is. Most people, myself included, don't read all of the terms and conditions in a warranty. Why? because I'm not a lawyer, and there are ways of saying things that don't mean what they sound like they mean. I just assume that if I have a problem, any type of problem, with a device that the manufacturer is going to look very hard for a reason not to cover it. No matter who that company is.
Agree 100%. It's silly to say how water resistant your phone is if it's a meaningless statement.
[doublepost=1484529777][/doublepost]
Funny stuff
You seem not to know what you're own posts are actually communicating; there was nothing "germane" (sic) about your response, My response was on point considering what you wrote and not what you think you wrote; nothing hyperbolic about it. You weren't talking the "concept" at all. Have fun with yourself, cause I'm done talking to you.
Oh yes. Totally wireless 5 second pairing to all your Apple Bluetooth devices is such a gimmick and--not to mention the charging box, the sound quality, the distance they work away from the iPhone, etc etc etc. Clearly you don't have them, haven't even tried them, and most importantly don't personally know anyone that actually owns owns a pair but here you are pontificating with conviction that they are must certainly just another gimmick...
A gimmick as in the iPhone? Which itself just passed the BILLIONTH unit sold.
Right? Right.
Oh -- judging by my own experience in actually owning a pair - I'm quite confident these will be one of Apples biggest "gimmicks" in years LOL. You have no clue how popular these already are.
People are missing the point of Apple these days - Apple needs to make money.
To expand their range of products to more countries Apple has to adopt more local demands.
In Japan any tech there has to be waterproof to be considered a worthy purchase.
In China they are emoji mad.
And so on.
It's just the numbers game. The more people they have as potential customers the better.
As for USA, UK and more traditional customers, well we are all left scratching out heads wondering what's going on.
To expand their range of products to more countries Apple has to adopt more local demands.
In Japan any tech there has to be waterproof to be considered a worthy purchase.
In China they are emoji mad.
And so on.
It's just the numbers game. The more people they have as potential customers the better.
As for USA, UK and more traditional customers, well we are all left scratching out heads wondering what's going on.
Thing is, it sold very well.
https://techcrunch.com/2016/08/10/t...-just-as-apple-planned-in-the-u-s-and-europe/
http://www.fool.com/investing/2016/07/27/apple-outperforms-expectations-on-strong-iphone-se.aspx
http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/apple-iphone-se-marketshare-q2-2016/
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer...e-se-is-the-best-selling-smartphone-in-the-uk
So it's a larger group than you realize.
While I somewhat agree with you on the Taptic Engine and AirPods. I will still disagree and here is my thought on this.
Taptic Engine -> How many NON-BUTTONS buttons to us during the day? I do, every time I get into my car, my touch screen gives me no touch feedback. It's all visual. Even the iPhones screen in older iPhones were the same way. Look at Touch Screen laptops, no touch feed back and people use those just fine. Do I think it works, absolutely, but is it necessary, no, therefor a gimmick.
AirPods -> The W1 chip, for all it's worth, just make it easier for APPLE's AirPods to connect to the iPhone and gives those AirPods longer battery life, so Apple says, I don't know, I don't use Wireless only because of the price for a decent pair and even those can't compete with wired headphones when it comes to sound quality, oh, and wired headphones never break up from interference. Also, is the W1 chip needed in a device to use the AirPods? Absolutely NOT. In the end, the AirPods are still a Bluetooth device.
Again, this is just my opinion and I don't not discourage you from yours. I don't have AirPods and I am totally happy about that and I could be totally Happy about not having a Taptic Engine in my phone as well, well maybe not now, that I am used to it.
For the 2 billionth time, setting your phone on a plugged in pad whilst you can't use it is not wireless charging.
Wireless charging is being able to walk into an area and the phone just charges as you utilize it normally.
Wireless charging is charging a device without hooking up to it with a wire connected to the battery -- hence "wireless".
Technically, Apple Watch uses wireless charging. No wire is connecting in to the watch for the purposes of charging it. It uses the modified Qi wireless charging mat which is everywhere. Unless you want to redefine the industry, charging a device using inductive charging is "wireless charging".
(That was rhetorical, we are not really going to redefine the industry based on this silly thread.)
However, to be progressive, I'd admit that wireless charging at range (vs on a mat) is far more sexy and would be welcome by the industry. But that's also wireless charging, not just a singular and sole interpretation of it.
to achieve IP68 Apple will be removing the Speakers. no one needs speakers you can use bluetooth