I'm sure many would be happy with the return of SD cards and waterproofness. We'll learn soon enough if it's true!
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.
Why has waterproofing become a 'requirement'?
- Thread starter Paco II
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not sure about waterproofness but I can guarantee SD card will be back since android 6.0 uses external storage as internal storage as well.
You sound very sure of yourself
As some people have pointed out before, Samsung profits from people buying the larger-capacity models of their flagship devices, so I wouldn't be so sure about the return of the SD card slot. It could happen, and it would please many people, but I wouldn't bet on that as I would on things such as their "take" on 3D-Touch and Live Photos.
We will see. Like I'm certain even though I have no evidence or proof. It makes sense for them to bring it back now and please all their users since marshmallow uses it and it would be considered as an upgrade over the S6.You sound very sure of yourself
As some people have pointed out before, Samsung profits from people buying the larger-capacity models of their flagship devices, so I wouldn't be so sure about the return of the SD card slot. It could happen, and it would please many people, but I wouldn't bet on that as I would on things such as their "take" on 3D-Touch and Live Photos.
For me waterproofing is not a requirement, but anyone around kids and pets is familiar with some interesting accidents.
Waterproof is fine for me, I would appreciate it.
Waterproof is fine for me, I would appreciate it.
I read somewhere (I think on this site) that a rather large percentage of phones taken in for service show water damage. If you can reduce warranty claims, you might save some costs.
Manufacturers warranty does not cover water damage.
You'd only be saving costs for the customer.
And the time of your hired help sorting out water damage claims and explaining to the customer about their water damaged phone.
Also, you would prevent any losses because you didn't notice the water damage before you swapped out.
Then, if it is a relatively common issue that you resolved (as it apparently is), you would increase your customer satisfaction at the same time. If you could do this all for a reasonable cost, why not do it? If it adds $50 to the build price, probably not.
I would argue that waterproof should be expected on a mobile device. It should be a no brainer. Waterproofing is not needed for devices that are intended to be used indoors. However, if the devices are intended to be used wherever users are, indoors or outdoors, it is only a good user experience if the device can hold on its own against nature. It doesn't have to have some extreme toughness, but I don't want to baby my smartphone just because there's a sprinkle of rain coming down.
Just like a watch. It is expected to be at least water resistant. It is a normal expectation, and by now, it should be standard for better user experience.
Just like a watch. It is expected to be at least water resistant. It is a normal expectation, and by now, it should be standard for better user experience.
I dont follow your lack of logic there. They dont just swap out devices without checking the moist sensors. There's steps and protocols that need to be followed and as far as having employees that sort out claims that's part of doing business.