natehoy
Well-known member
My understanding when the Moto X 2013 first came out is that they used the same coating that the Galaxy S4 Active used, which is the same basic stuff that used to be marketed as Liquipel and other brands back before that. The trouble is, the Galaxy S4 Active was overhyped as a "lifeproof" phone when the nanocoating is, at best, "water resistant". Very useful for rain or a quick dunk, but people were thinking the Active could be used for underwater photography and stuff.
I seem to recall reading somewhere that when Motorola announced the phone, they took one look at the horror show that was the Galaxy S4 Active's release from June and decided to downplay the coating for fear of a high return rate due to people saying "well, it looked like a great skipping stone shape, and I retrieved it at low tide 6 hours later, but it doesn't work and you said it was waterproof!"
Samsung is still using the same coating, which is great, but they are marketing it much less aggressively, which is wise.
I seem to recall reading somewhere that when Motorola announced the phone, they took one look at the horror show that was the Galaxy S4 Active's release from June and decided to downplay the coating for fear of a high return rate due to people saying "well, it looked like a great skipping stone shape, and I retrieved it at low tide 6 hours later, but it doesn't work and you said it was waterproof!"
Samsung is still using the same coating, which is great, but they are marketing it much less aggressively, which is wise.