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.
iPhone X Iphone IP67 is not waterproof, is it a scam ?
- Thread starter CedCanada
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The majority of the time my phone isn't in the bathroom when I shower, so I do attempt to minimize the exposure.
There is no need to start when all I said was "That shouldn't show as liquid damage though as the phone wasn't physically in water. I had an issue with getting my iPhone X replaced which has never been in water."
How will this trillion dollar company survive without your facebook Instragram tweets?
You take your phone in the shower with you and wonder how it got liquid damaged?!
Not only is that tempting fate which is ridiculous for such an expensive device, but steam produced from the shower can seep into cracks in a way that water normally can’t. This is basic physics. My word do I despair for humanity sometimes.
If there were steam in the shower, you would most likely be killed or have severe burns all over your body.
The white like stuff you see in the shower is simply water vapor (think kind of like fog) in the air, not steam. Steam is colorless and has a min temp of 212f (at sea level).
It’s fine to be pedantic though I’m almost certain you’re aware most people refer to that as steam, so you know what I meant.
It also doesn’t refute the point that the water vapour would enter cracks that flowing water could normally not penetrate.
So we’re back to the OP taking their phone in the shower and wondering why it got liquid damaged.
Water vapor destroys the sealing and will enter the phone. Both Samsung and Apple have disclaimers against people using phones in showers. It’s use at your own risk. Get damage and they will just deny you repairs. Neither ip67 nor ip68 cover vapor damage.
To avoid problems like this reoccurring, don't shower with your electronic gadgets.
I recall when Apple announced IP67 during the iPhone 7 launch. It felt like a very fine line they were walking to show that the phone is water resistant, but also that it’s not a feature to allow submersing the phone in water. More so to help mitigate risk of damage from accidental submersion.
Something like the Apple Watch (series 2 and newer) is a different story as they are IP68 and have functions designed for water submersion (pool and open water swimming).
Something like the Apple Watch (series 2 and newer) is a different story as they are IP68 and have functions designed for water submersion (pool and open water swimming).
You said it was a very fine line, when it wasn't. At no point did Apple say their devices were water proof, so I don't see the issue. As usual, people do stupid things like shower with their phone or submerge it in water for a period of time then act all astonished when it no longer works.
I said Apple was walking it like a fine line, not that it is a fine line. Mostly because the way the majority of people and the press refer to these water resistant phones as waterproof.
We’re probably in the minority here that truly understand the ratings and appreciate what they mean and how to treat these devices. But so often, especially in tech press I see more about water proof. Heck, I feel like many Android manufacturers advertise about the ability to submerse a phone in water.
And I imagine that many people are hoping for new flashy features every year. Kind of weird announcing IP67 but having to tell people it doesn’t mean you can submerse.
In a perfect world, you're right. But sometimes there is something is going on where someone might need to get ahold of me immediately which is why I sometimes have my phone in the bathroom when I am showering. What is your solution? Is it not to take a shower? It isn't like I know exactly when I will receive a call so I can't plan around it.
From my read nothing at all.
When the iPhone 7 launched and they were promoting the water resistance feature at this time, there actually was a brief commercial/ad where they showing a Male by a pool falling in backwards, but as he was falling in, you see the phone trying to be held above water as he fell in, but I don’t believe they actually showed the phone going underwater. That ad was briefly Shown and I never really saw much of it again, but kind of controversial of the whole ‘water resistant rating’ of what you were referring to in your post.
Don't take your phone in the shower. Nothing is that important that it can't wait a few mins.
I never said my phone was in the shower. Having it in the bathroom and having it in the shower are not the same. You are incorrect, some calls can't wait until later.
hmm... Shower can wait, too. ---There's nothing so important that can't go to voice mail.
Give your phone a rest. Good for it (and you, too)
Perhaps in your life, but in my life there are calls that can't be missed. Also just because I have my phone on or near me doesn't mean I am on it the whole time.
Except it isn't that simple sometimes. Yes, the shower can wait too, but that could end up being a long wait. Sometimes there are things going on that I need to be able to be reached immediately and not wait until later.
You're right. This is all BS. They show a guy falling in a pool, they show people doing various water sports with the watch etc. so they do give you the idea that you can take these things in the water. Any time you say it can be submerged 1 m for 30 minutes, you are certainly giving people the idea that it can be used in the water. No one cares about the technicality of vapour and ****, and if you do, you're a sucker of a consumer.
The reality is a mass produced item is hard to ensure when it comes to waterproofing. Someone applied a layer wrong, a manufacturing mistake made somewhere, and your waterproofing was never there to begin with. Unlike high end watches, they don't test the phones for waterproofing before they leave the factory. Also, the moment you sit with it in your pocket, you risk bending it slightly, enough that again the seals can't be trusted. I get why they don't warranty these phones against water damage, but I don't think they should say they're IP67 either.
No company claims theirs products are waterproof, that's a layman's term. A Rolex Deep Sea Dweller is "water resistant" too, not waterproof, but you expect that you can use it down to the rated 3900 m. The people here make all kinds of excuses for Apple, getting hung up on terminology, but this advertising is BS and I hope they get called out on it at some point in Canada or Europe.
The reality is a mass produced item is hard to ensure when it comes to waterproofing. Someone applied a layer wrong, a manufacturing mistake made somewhere, and your waterproofing was never there to begin with. Unlike high end watches, they don't test the phones for waterproofing before they leave the factory. Also, the moment you sit with it in your pocket, you risk bending it slightly, enough that again the seals can't be trusted. I get why they don't warranty these phones against water damage, but I don't think they should say they're IP67 either.
No company claims theirs products are waterproof, that's a layman's term. A Rolex Deep Sea Dweller is "water resistant" too, not waterproof, but you expect that you can use it down to the rated 3900 m. The people here make all kinds of excuses for Apple, getting hung up on terminology, but this advertising is BS and I hope they get called out on it at some point in Canada or Europe.
Here's the thing as I see it. Large numbers of people accidentally exposed older-model iPhones to liquids, and they encountered the heartbreak of a total loss. (In the case of Apple, iPhone 6 and earlier had no liquid sealing whatsoever.) Customers begged to have their devices less prone to accidental damage (more durable screens, some degree of water sealing). Manufacturers delivered on the desire by adding a certain degree of water-resistance.
They're not selling scuba dive watches, they're selling electronic appliances. Whatever they can do is an improvement, but truly waterproof electronics is very hard (and expensive) to do. Their goal was to reduce the number of "fatal" accidents, not start a new era of communications for swimmers and divers.
So... should the manufacturers say nothing about the added accident protection and simply leave their customers pleasantly surprised when their phones survive an accident that might have destroyed an earlier model?
It's a competitive world. Apple was criticized for several years because they hadn't yet added the water resistance some other manufacturers had added. Should Apple have kept quiet once they matched the competition?