Exactly, the Iphone X won't break and I won't keep it in any sort of case because we all know that Squaretrade is filled with liars and the glass on the Iphone X is the greatest strongest glass ever made and will never crack...EVER!!!!!!
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.
SquareTrade Says iPhone X is 'Most Breakable iPhone Ever' as Glass Shatters in Series of Drop Tests
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Exactly, the Iphone X won't break and I won't keep it in any sort of case because we all know that Squaretrade is filled with liars and the glass on the Iphone X is the greatest strongest glass ever made and will never crack...EVER!!!!!!
I don't have time to type a counter argument to everything you said, but consider it countered with facts, citations, and scientific reasoning. BURN!!!
Wow, is Apple Care on the X is expensive. Everything about the phone is expensive. I think I would just take my chances at that price for Apple Care, or better yet, not get an iPhone X to worry about it. I feel like I get more out of Apple Care on my iPad Pro being that it costs $99. I guess Apple can get away with any price since they know people will get it with their X. Oh, it's just a extra few bucks on your monthly payment.
Yeah because Apple doesn't recommend Applecare with every item sold, which based on their obscene repair prices is pretty much mandatory.
[doublepost=1509984822][/doublepost]
Billions in repair costs and replacement phones would be the answer.
If Apple had made the rear glass as easy to change as on the 4, and 4S, this would NOT be an issue. I understand there would be difficulty in doing this with charging, however, They likely could have had a gasket / seal for this glass, have it be removable, and, if needed, had the coil integrated into it, making users have to replace that at the same time.
Honestly @convergent you have the headline wrong. You left out the word iPhone, which completely changes the meaning of the headline when you omit that. It may in fact be the most fragile phone ever, but that is not what was said.
Also, Not sure how it is Apple’s fault that Samsung went with Glass, since the Note is a good device, and clearly they didn’t copy anyone when they put it into production. As far as the iPhone and Apple being the only company guilty of design over function, what does having a screen that curves at the edge actually do besides providing a more immersive user experience?
It’s done for aesthetics and for design, with Samsung doing that all on their own. It also introduces a trade off in durability, as that edge is more susceptible to damage, than a phone with a traditional plastic or metal surround.
Samsung designs all on their own, and they introduce their own trade off in durability for a great looking design.
.
Honestly @convergent you have the headline wrong. You left out the word iPhone, which completely changes the meaning of the headline when you omit that. It may in fact be the most fragile phone ever, but that is not what was said.
Also, Not sure how it is Apple’s fault that Samsung went with Glass, since the Note is a good device, and clearly they didn’t copy anyone when they put it into production. As far as the iPhone and Apple being the only company guilty of design over function, what does having a screen that curves at the edge actually do besides providing a more immersive user experience?
It’s done for aesthetics and for design, with Samsung doing that all on their own. It also introduces a trade off in durability, as that edge is more susceptible to damage, than a phone with a traditional plastic or metal surround.
Samsung designs all on their own, and they introduce their own trade off in durability for a great looking design.
.
That is why I don’t understand why there is so much emotion over this headline, and statement. Clearly people buying phones that have Glass surfaces will use some care with them. I know of many people that run Note 8, iPhone 8 devices with no case, and have zero problems. Just use care.
I cringe every time they say how durable their glass is (on any device) because it usually is proven otherwise. But like this Square Trade video, it is all just marketing, right?
So huge ugly case is a must-have for the X then..
I'm liking this thing less and less. Horrible notch, screen has loads of unusuable space, so for general use it's not much bigger than a standard 8, and now as expected it's the easiet to break.
Cracking the screen is annoying, but having the phone rendered unusable is extremely annoying.
Happy to stick with the durable metal-backed 7 tbh!
I'm liking this thing less and less. Horrible notch, screen has loads of unusuable space, so for general use it's not much bigger than a standard 8, and now as expected it's the easiet to break.
Cracking the screen is annoying, but having the phone rendered unusable is extremely annoying.
Happy to stick with the durable metal-backed 7 tbh!
Would love to be up against you in a debate. Literally everything I said was factually accurate, and from an average consumer interest standpoint not even controversial. But you have shown that you have no objectivity and blindly defend everything Apple does.
Please defend making a phone that the back cover easily shatters if you drop it, and cost $549 to replace? A non-functional cover costs almost double the average selling price of a smartphone ($245 per link listed)? https://www.statista.com/statistics/484583/global-average-selling-price-smartphones/
Of course not...just pick up the new iPhone X leather folio case from Apple for a mere $99! I paid less than that for a Sena iPad Pro leather case.
The big point here is; To fix a samsung glass back, it's going to cost you $50, probably less if you go to a 3rd party. To fix an Iphone x back, its going to cost $550.
Samsung (and others) have no issue with a glass back because they designed it to be relatively easy to change if you break it.
I can't for the life of me fathom why apple engineers thought that integrating the glass back directly into the chassis was a good idea. It is a real two fingers up at the users, more so to those without applecare.
The cynic in me things perhaps it is deliberate to get people to buy apple care?
Regarding screens, meh, they are all in the same ball park cost wise to replace, regardless of make or model (OEM).
I am aware of that, hence why I started that comment by mentioning the ease of changing the 4 and 4S back glass. FWIW they set the precedent for making those repairs cheap and simple, but, didn’t follow their own recipes.
I get that the 4 and 4S were harder to change screens as compared to newer phones, however, they could have made the back hinge away using the same methods. Had they attached the Logic board to the frame, and having the Back glass, charge coil, and perhaps camera array swing out like the front does, the X would be a trivial device to repair.
But, it’s always easier to say this than it is to design it.
What exactly is unscientific about drop tests? I can absolutely assure you that Apple is drop testing their own devices. Maybe the ones you see on Youtube are not "scientific", but I can assure you that if done proper, there is a lot of valuable data to be gathered from drop testing.
Regarding Apple’s increases in the price of screen & back repairs and AppleCare itself to levels that many of us are questioning as unfair:
Maybe this is part of the “early adopter premium” that Apple has charged in one form or another on every new product it sells?
This early adopter premium takes various forms, like an extraordinarily high price (like the X, or the first super-skinny MacBook from 2014 or 2015). Sometimes Apple includes cost-cutting compromises in the first generation of the product, like an outdated underpowered processor or an outdated, crappy FaceTime camera (which even the 3rd generation of the MacBook still has). The first Apple Watch was expensive, underpowered, and buggy. The first iPhone with the pressure-sensitive screen (the 6S) has compromised battery life. Etc etc etc.
I don’t blame Apple for this. It sinks incredible sums into R&D and has to make that back somehow. Early adopters have the highest willingness to pay, and usually are aware that the first gen versions are not a good value in terms of price to performance. So Apple is saying “you can have this product 1 year before everyone else but it will cost you, either in money or performance compromises or both.”
Now, it seems Apple has found another way to get more money out of early adopters: charge them extra for repairs and for AppleCare (which the consumer MUST buy in order to use Apple’s payment plan, which, in turn is the only way some of us can afford to buy a $1150 phone).
Maybe this is part of the “early adopter premium” that Apple has charged in one form or another on every new product it sells?
This early adopter premium takes various forms, like an extraordinarily high price (like the X, or the first super-skinny MacBook from 2014 or 2015). Sometimes Apple includes cost-cutting compromises in the first generation of the product, like an outdated underpowered processor or an outdated, crappy FaceTime camera (which even the 3rd generation of the MacBook still has). The first Apple Watch was expensive, underpowered, and buggy. The first iPhone with the pressure-sensitive screen (the 6S) has compromised battery life. Etc etc etc.
I don’t blame Apple for this. It sinks incredible sums into R&D and has to make that back somehow. Early adopters have the highest willingness to pay, and usually are aware that the first gen versions are not a good value in terms of price to performance. So Apple is saying “you can have this product 1 year before everyone else but it will cost you, either in money or performance compromises or both.”
Now, it seems Apple has found another way to get more money out of early adopters: charge them extra for repairs and for AppleCare (which the consumer MUST buy in order to use Apple’s payment plan, which, in turn is the only way some of us can afford to buy a $1150 phone).
I only see three things:
1: Simply beautiful design that will catch your attention, you know you want to buy it - More profit to apple.
2: Accident or careless with iPhone - apple make money out of you!
3: Require Apple care, because you have no choice due higher fee repair charge. - they also make money out of you
Apple want to reach to the 1st trillion dollar company!!
1: Simply beautiful design that will catch your attention, you know you want to buy it - More profit to apple.
2: Accident or careless with iPhone - apple make money out of you!
3: Require Apple care, because you have no choice due higher fee repair charge. - they also make money out of you
Apple want to reach to the 1st trillion dollar company!!
6' is a bizarre drop height to test. Ok, it's worth testing if phones are still ok after 3-4' drops, but otherwise...
I reckon the X has some way to go in beating the iPhone 4/5 in terms of breakability. The majority of my friends/family who had one fixed the screen the first time it broke, then never bothered the next time and just used a phone with a broken screen. Mine broke twice, both times from about 2' height onto a wooden floor. I reckon the exposed edge of the glass in that design was the cause.
Sure, no one should drop their phone. But glass seems a weird material to use in such an easily dropped (and expensive) device.
