Welcome to the Android Central Forums Create Your Account or Ask a Question Answers in 5 minutes - no registration required!
Results 1 to 19 of 19
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By JeffDenver
  1. Thread Author  Thread Author    #1  
    JeffDenver's Avatar

    Posts
    2,583 Posts
    Global Posts
    2,603 Global Posts
    ROM
    Perma-rooted and unlocked

    Default iProducts top Square-Trade's "most breakable" devices list

    So much for that "Apple build quality" myth eh?


    The top ten list of most breakable gadgets in full:
    1. iPad Mini - 7.5
    2. Samsung Galaxy S4 - 7
    3. iPad Air - 6.5
    4. Samsung Galaxy S3 - 6.5
    5. iPhone 5C - 6
    6. Nexus 7.1 - 6
    7. Samsung Galaxy Tab 3 - 5.5
    8. iPhone 5S - 5.5
    9. Nexus 7.2 - 5
    10. Moto X - 4.5

    Apple products dominate list of 'most breakable gadgets' - Telegraph
    Hmmm...not seeing the Nexus 5 in that list. Or even the far-more-fragile Nexus 4. (Do see the Moto X though)
  2. #2  
    UJ95x's Avatar

    Posts
    7,465 Posts
    Global Posts
    7,642 Global Posts
    ROM
    Slim Kat 4.4.4

    Default Re: iProducts top Square-Trade's "most breakable" devices list

    Quote Originally Posted by JeffDenver View Post
    So much for that "Apple build quality" myth eh?




    Hmmm...not seeing the Nexus 5 in that list. Or even the far-more-fragile Nexus 4. (Do see the Moto X though)
    I think the Nexus 5 would be somewhere in between 5 and 6.
    The iPhone has pretty good build quality, but I think the fact that it's made of aluminum makes the impact a lot harder when hitting hard surfaces as opposed to a phone made of plastic

    Sent from my Galaxy S4 running Slim Bean 4.3
    "We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology." - Carl Sagan
  3. #3  
    Golfdriver97's Avatar

    Posts
    18,127 Posts
    Global Posts
    18,479 Global Posts
    ROM
    Liquidsmooth ROM

    Default Re: iProducts top Square-Trade's "most breakable" devices list

    Quote Originally Posted by UJ95x View Post
    I think the Nexus 5 would be somewhere in between 5 and 6.
    The iPhone has pretty good build quality, but I think the fact that it's made of aluminum makes the impact a lot harder when hitting hard surfaces as opposed to a phone made of plastic

    Sent from my Galaxy S4 running Slim Bean 4.3
    Hard to say. The HTC One is the same material, and didn't even make the list. But I also couldn't pull up the website, so I may be missing criteria.

    From a Sprint Moto X using AC Forums app

    Phone Timeline
    'If we could change ourselves, the tendencies in the world would also change.' - Mahatma Gandhi
    Community Guidelines and also here
  4. Thread Author  Thread Author    #4  
    JeffDenver's Avatar

    Posts
    2,583 Posts
    Global Posts
    2,603 Global Posts
    ROM
    Perma-rooted and unlocked

    Default Re: iProducts top Square-Trade's "most breakable" devices list

    Quote Originally Posted by UJ95x View Post
    I think the Nexus 5 would be somewhere in between 5 and 6.
    You would think. But that isn't what their tests show.

    And their experience does not seem to be isolated: Nexus 5: After Three Months Of Use, It's The Best All-Around Android Phone - Forbes
  5. #5  
    UJ95x's Avatar

    Posts
    7,465 Posts
    Global Posts
    7,642 Global Posts
    ROM
    Slim Kat 4.4.4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JeffDenver View Post
    You would think. But that isn't what their tests show.

    And their experience does not seem to be isolated: Nexus 5: After Three Months Of Use, It's The Best All-Around Android Phone - Forbes
    It wasn't in the list of first site you linked. That's why I was guessing what it would score on the test

    Sent from my Galaxy S4 running Slim Bean 4.3
    "We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology." - Carl Sagan
  6. #6  
    UJ95x's Avatar

    Posts
    7,465 Posts
    Global Posts
    7,642 Global Posts
    ROM
    Slim Kat 4.4.4

    Default Re: iProducts top Square-Trade's "most breakable" devices list

    Quote Originally Posted by Golfdriver97 View Post
    Hard to say. The HTC One is the same material, and didn't even make the list. But I also couldn't pull up the website, so I may be missing criteria.

    From a Sprint Moto X using AC Forums app
    It wasn't on the list, but I think it would score about the same as the iPhone, or maybe a bit worse, considering it weighs a lot more.

    Sent from my Galaxy S4 running Slim Bean 4.3
    "We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology." - Carl Sagan
  7. #7  

    Default Re: iProducts top Square-Trade's "most breakable" devices list

    So a place that sells insurance for mobile devices has determined that all of the most popular ones also happen to be the "most breakable?" That is a fortunate coincidence for them.

    I only looked briefly, but does anyone have a link that shows more information about their methods and which devices were being tested? How do we know the top 10 most breakable devices aren't also the only 10 that were checked? What sort of difference is there between the most and least breakable? This sounds more like marketing than it does science to me.
  8. Thread Author  Thread Author    #8  
    JeffDenver's Avatar

    Posts
    2,583 Posts
    Global Posts
    2,603 Global Posts
    ROM
    Perma-rooted and unlocked

    Default Re: iProducts top Square-Trade's "most breakable" devices list

    Quote Originally Posted by UJ95x View Post
    It wasn't on the list, but I think it would score about the same as the iPhone, or maybe a bit worse, considering it weighs a lot more.
    The weight has little to do with it in my experience. The materials and construction matter more.

    My HTC Rezound was a lot heavier than my Nexus 4, and survived far worse drops with little damage. In fact, out of all the times I dropped it the screen never broke once. Even on concrete.
    ffejjj likes this.
  9. Thread Author  Thread Author    #9  
    JeffDenver's Avatar

    Posts
    2,583 Posts
    Global Posts
    2,603 Global Posts
    ROM
    Perma-rooted and unlocked

    Default Re: iProducts top Square-Trade's "most breakable" devices list

    Quote Originally Posted by garublador View Post
    So a place that sells insurance for mobile devices has determined that all of the most popular ones also happen to be the "most breakable?" That is a fortunate coincidence for them.

    I only looked briefly, but does anyone have a link that shows more information about their methods and which devices were being tested? How do we know the top 10 most breakable devices aren't also the only 10 that were checked? What sort of difference is there between the most and least breakable? This sounds more like marketing than it does science to me.
    Why would they have an agenda. People who buy cheap phones are also a lot less likely to bother with insurance. Why would you pay a $70 (total) premium on a $100 phone?
  10. Thread Author  Thread Author    #10  
    JeffDenver's Avatar

    Posts
    2,583 Posts
    Global Posts
    2,603 Global Posts
    ROM
    Perma-rooted and unlocked

    Default Re: iProducts top Square-Trade's "most breakable" devices list

    Quote Originally Posted by UJ95x View Post
    It wasn't in the list of first site you linked.
    Exactly. It did not make the top 10 most breakable devices.

    That is not the total number of devices they tested. It is just the 10 worst.
  11. #11  
    UJ95x's Avatar

    Posts
    7,465 Posts
    Global Posts
    7,642 Global Posts
    ROM
    Slim Kat 4.4.4

    Default Re: iProducts top Square-Trade's "most breakable" devices list

    OK. I see now. I had only seen the 10 you showed in your actual post

    Sent from my Galaxy S4 running Slim Bean 4.3
    "We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology." - Carl Sagan
  12. Thread Author  Thread Author    #12  
    JeffDenver's Avatar

    Posts
    2,583 Posts
    Global Posts
    2,603 Global Posts
    ROM
    Perma-rooted and unlocked

    Default Re: iProducts top Square-Trade's "most breakable" devices list

    Quote Originally Posted by UJ95x View Post
    OK. I see now. I had only seen the 10 you showed in your actual post

    Sent from my Galaxy S4 running Slim Bean 4.3
    Yeah we don't get to see the entire list just the top 10. For all I know the Nexus 5 is #11. (I doubt it, but it's possible)

    Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk
  13. #13  

    Default Re: iProducts top Square-Trade's "most breakable" devices list

    Quote Originally Posted by JeffDenver View Post
    Why would they have an agenda.
    They sell insurance on these devices. The way they make money is talking people into giving them money to protect their device in case it breaks. They have a financial incentive to convince people the device they're using will probably break so they'll spend money on the insurance. It's like Apple conducing a study that shows that people who use Android devices will become impotent, suffer from ED and die

    Quote Originally Posted by JeffDenver View Post
    People who buy cheap phones are also a lot less likely to bother with insurance. Why would you pay a $70 (total) premium on a $100 phone?
    And according to this "study" all of these devices are more breakable than the $100 phones.

    If your BS detector isn't going off at full blast when looking at this report I have a bridge to a private island off the coast of Arizona I'm willing to sell you at a great price. With the information given not only is there very clear bias when an insurance company does a "study" showing that the stuff they insure is more likely to happen, but there's clearly selection bias going on, the methods aren't disclosed and the results aren't quantified at all. Any one of those would qualify this as junk science and there's three of them all stacked on top of one another.

    Think of it this way, what if they reversed the list and called it the most durable devices? We would be getting the exact same information but it would sound like the devices are rugged rather than fragile. This is marketing, not science.

    In related news, the pork producers found that eating chicken or beef will cause your hair to fall out and give you brain cancer, Dell found that you lose 10 IQ points just by visiting an Apple store and Lenovo just discovered that buying a Motorola phone will raise your chances of winning the lottery to 99%.
  14. Thread Author  Thread Author    #14  
    JeffDenver's Avatar

    Posts
    2,583 Posts
    Global Posts
    2,603 Global Posts
    ROM
    Perma-rooted and unlocked

    Default Re: iProducts top Square-Trade's "most breakable" devices list

    Quote Originally Posted by garublador View Post
    They sell insurance on these devices.
    Yeah, thats my point. Why would they try to get you to buy devices that you are not likely to want insurance on? Who buys insurance for cheap phones?

    If anything their incentive should be the opposite. They want you to buy devices you are likely to want to insure. That means expensive devices. The devices on this list are not cheap.

    And according to this "study" all of these devices are more breakable than the $100 phones.
    Yes they are. and they should be. there is more stuff packed into a smaller area.
  15. #15  

    Default Re: iProducts top Square-Trade's "most breakable" devices list

    Quote Originally Posted by JeffDenver View Post
    Yeah, thats my point. Why would they try to get you to buy devices that you are not likely to want insurance on? Who buys insurance for cheap phones?
    No one. That's why it's selection bias. They only tested phones that people are likely to buy insurance on. They aren't actually finding a list of the most breakable phones, they're compiling a list of the most popular phones they think people are most likely to want insurance on and then claiming they're also the "most breakable." If Apple did this study and it showed that none of their devices showed up on the list would you be at all suspicious?

    Quote Originally Posted by JeffDenver View Post
    If anything their incentive should be the opposite. They want you to buy devices you are likely to want to insure. That means expensive devices. The devices on this list are not cheap.
    But they're also top rated devices. You can have a top rated device, but just know that it will break if you look at it funny. Fortunately we have a solution! You can have the best performance and not worry about it spontaneously combusting if you buy our insurance!


    Quote Originally Posted by JeffDenver View Post
    Yes they are. and they should be. there is more stuff packed into a smaller area.
    That's an invalid assumption based on no data. It's what they want you to assume by omitting the results.

    How about commenting on their lack of method description, quantifiable results, the use of an independent lab or full list of devices checked? Again, any one of those invalidates a study like this and they're doing all of them.

    I'm actually serious about that bridge. PM me for details.
    Thanked by:
  16. Thread Author  Thread Author    #16  
    JeffDenver's Avatar

    Posts
    2,583 Posts
    Global Posts
    2,603 Global Posts
    ROM
    Perma-rooted and unlocked

    Default Re: iProducts top Square-Trade's "most breakable" devices list

    Quote Originally Posted by garublador View Post
    No one. That's why it's selection bias. They only tested phones that people are likely to buy insurance on.
    Again, thats the point. That is why they did these tests.

    The point of the tests was not to badmouth Apple and Samsung products. The point of the tests was to determine which devices were the most likely to result in claims. They simply chose to share this info with the public to educate them on which devices are most fragile, but that was not the original point of the tests.

    They aren't actually finding a list of the most breakable phones, they're compiling a list of the most popular phones they think people are most likely to want insurance on and then claiming they're also the "most breakable."
    ...via actual tests. They are not just making empty claims...they ran tests to determine this. The list is not arbitrary. This list is based on the findings from their tests.

    If Apple did this study and it showed that none of their devices showed up on the list would you be at all suspicious?
    Apple would have reason for bias. This company does not. Their only bias would be against devices they really think are more breakable. They have no incentive to lie.

    But they're also top rated devices. You can have a top rated device, but just know that it will break if you look at it funny. Fortunately we have a solution! You can have the best performance and not worry about it spontaneously combusting if you buy our insurance!
    So what? That still does not mean they would have a bias for one phone over another.

    How about commenting on their lack of method description, quantifiable results, the use of an independent lab or full list of devices checked?
    If you have better sources feel free to post them. I'd be happy to look at them.

    I accept their list sight unseen because they are an authority (this is their business) and because they are a respected company in the insurance market. Read their reviews if you don't believe me.

    Quote Originally Posted by garublador View Post
    I'm actually serious about that bridge. PM me for details.
    Would you like a Tinfoil hat in place of payment?
    Last edited by JeffDenver; 02-13-2014 at 12:54 PM.
  17. #17  

    Default Re: iProducts top Square-Trade's "most breakable" devices list

    Quote Originally Posted by JeffDenver View Post
    Again, thats the point. That is why they did these tests.
    They may have done the test to calculate how much to charge for insurance, but the way they're published the list is meaningless for any other analysis. They're being presented as a way for consumers to evaluate the different hardware, but that's impossible to do with the information they've given. The only use from publishing data like that is to advertise their insurance.

    Quote Originally Posted by JeffDenver View Post
    The point of the tests was not to badmouth Apple and Samsung products. The point of the tests was to determine which devices were the most likely to result in claims. They simply chose to share this info with the public to educate them on which devices are most fragile, but that was not the original point of the tests.
    Again, if you believe that you'll absolutely love the bridge deal I have. You're making a huge assumption based on zero data. If that were the case they'd give their methods, a list of phones they've tested and quantifiable results. Without that it could be a reverse list of the 10 hardest to damage devices as far as we know. The phones are presented as "breakable" to sell insurance.


    Quote Originally Posted by JeffDenver View Post
    ...via actual tests. They are not just making empty claims...they ran tests to determine this. The list is not arbitrary. This list is based on the findings from their tests.
    Of course it's not arbitrary, they picked those devices to test because there's the greatest chance of people buying insurance on them. There's no way to tell if the insurance is warranted because just how "breakable" they are is not disclosed and we don't have a list of any other devices tested. But with no way to validate their methods or quantify the results the list they gave is meaningless. It's simply a ranking they gave to those 10 specific phones.


    Quote Originally Posted by JeffDenver View Post
    Apple would have reason for bias. This company does not. Their only bias would be against devices they really think are more breakable. They have no incentive to lie.
    Their biased towards the most popular devices people are likely to want insurance on.


    Quote Originally Posted by JeffDenver View Post
    So what? That still does not mean they would have a bias for one phone over another.
    Not anyone specific phone, but a specific set of phones. Again, how do we know this isn't a list of the 10 most durable phones in reverse? If they only tested those 10 (which is the only thing we can assume based on what they published), then you have no way of knowing where they actually stand in terms of device durability. You need to test a much larger set of phones and publish that list to make any sort of claim about "most breakable device."


    Quote Originally Posted by JeffDenver View Post
    If you have better sources feel free to post them. I'd be happy to look at them.
    So because there isn't another study done, then this study must be valid? That's a pretty blatant logical fallacy.

    Quote Originally Posted by JeffDenver View Post
    I accept their list sight unseen because they are an authority (this is their business) and because they are a respected company in the insurance market. Read their reviews if you don't believe me.
    We're talking about evaluating a scientific study, not selling insurance. They've obviously good at selling insurance, which is the claim I'm making. That says nothing about how good they are at science, which is what we're talking about.

    I don't doubt that the list is how they rate those 10 specific devices in terms of durability. However, that is the only information we can get from that list. Just how "breakable" they are or how those devices measure up against any other device is still unknown. The could be the 10 most durable, the 10 most breakable or they could be scattered around the list of all devices. The list is specifically presented to get people with poor critical thinking skills to fill in gaps about just how breakable they are and how they measure up against all other devices. I'm saying that's not the right way to view the list. That's why it's marketing, they're using what they know about how people think to get you to think that their insurance is necessary if you own one of the most popular devices. They're presenting it as science even though they fit none of the criteria for a valid scientific study.
    Thanked by:
  18. #18  

    Default Re: iProducts top Square-Trade's "most breakable" devices list

    Quote Originally Posted by JeffDenver View Post
    So much for that "Apple build quality" myth eh?
    Though related, build quality and durability are not at all the same thing. Build quality is about what materials are used and how well a device is put together. Durability is about how it handles drops, falls, and the accidents that happen in life. All other things being equal, better bulid quality will lead to more durability, but all things aren't equal across all devices. Some materials are more fragile than others. Often, the most durable desing isn't the best looking design. You can have to devices with equal build quality, but have one that is designed to look good and one that is designed to be rugged. The ruggedly designed one will obviously be more durable even if the build quality is equal.
  19. #19  

    Default Re: iProducts top Square-Trade's "most breakable" devices list

    Quote Originally Posted by garublador View Post
    .....
    In related news, the pork producers found that eating chicken or beef will cause your hair to fall out and give you brain cancer, Dell found that you lose 10 IQ points just by visiting an Apple store and Lenovo just discovered that buying a Motorola phone will raise your chances of winning the lottery to 99%.


    Sent from my SM-N900V using AC Forums mobile app
    People say, it's not the size of the boat, it's the motion of the ocean that counts.

    But you can't get to China in a canoe.....

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 34
    Last Post: 07-01-2014, 01:35 PM
  2. Trading the iPhone 5 for the S4
    By bgl321 in forum Verizon Samsung Galaxy S4
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-06-2014, 05:44 AM
  3. Samsung Devices vs. Nexus Devices: Need Help Choosing
    By Fishfam4 in forum General Help and How To
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 02-13-2014, 10:24 AM
  4. Not listed under google play music devices list
    By dzigner in forum Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1 (2014)
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-12-2014, 08:34 PM
  5. Android device comparable to Ipod?
    By BORIStheBLADE in forum General News & Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-11-2014, 06:17 PM

Posting Permissions