Otterbox Defender vs. Griffin Survivor...screen protectors

[hakr100]

I have an Otterbox Defender on my iPhone 5. Previously, I had an iPhone 4S with a Griffin Survivor case. I like both cases, though I do prefer the Otterbox because it leaves the back of phone camera uncovered and ready to use.

The Otterbox product, however, apparently uses a more "scratchable" front screen protector than the Griffin product. I carried the 4S in my pocket for nearly two years and the screen protector only accumulated fine-line scratches that were virtually impossible to see. The Otterbox screen protected seems to scratch more deeply and more easily.

 

[Six8]

Is the screen protector on the griffin removable?

 

[hakr100]

No. It is glued to the front part of the plastic case. I suppose you could remove it with a razor knife and use a regular screen protector on the iPhone, but the attached screen protector also cuts back on the amount of dirt that gets to the phone itself.

The solution is for Otterbox to use a better piece of clear plastic for the screen protector.

 

[Six8]

Thanks hakr

 

[Arelunde]

There's other threads on this topic, but here's what I did ... put a 3rd party screen protector on the iPhone 5, removed the Otterbox Defender's SP and it works perfectly. Having two screen protectors, one on top of the other, didn't work. I didn't want to take off the perfectly installed 3rd party SP, so this was the obvious solution. No regrets.

BTW, you can easily remove the ODefender's SP by pushing on the edges from the outside of the (empty) case. It's just glued in and the glue lets go easily with no residue left behind.