Galaxy S5 Water Resistant?! Maybe "in your dreams" but not mine ;)

[theonlybuster]

Re: water resistant my bottom

For those of you who do not know how Ingress Protection (IP) testing works in regards to water, the devices begins by having water droplets dropped onto the phone at various angles including the front, back, and sides. This goes on for a few minutes, they then check to see if water has impeded the device and if the device is still correctly working. Following that, the device is then mildly splashed with water, often similarly to that of someone jumping into a pool and splashing those standing along the sides. If the device passes that, the device is submerged into still water. First it's a quick in and out, then a 1minute in and out, and it continues until it surpasses the 30minute mark.
The fact that the device is ONLY rated for "up to 30min" fully submerged in water, tells you the seals simple NOT the best and at most, the device was really on designed to be occassionally splashed, MAYBE dropped into a kitchen sink every once in a while, and since apparently so many people text and Social network from the bathroom they made it able to withstand the occassional surprise dip with your "doo". Not made to go swimming with you
The other side of the argument is the jets test, now obviously if the device's seals aren't strong enough to withstand more than 30min submerged in water, it's typically safe to assume the jets test will demolish the device (which is what we see happening). If memory serves me, the first test is roughly 15PSI, then it increases to 30PSI and on and on. NOW keep in mind the AVERAGE faucet is roughly 60PSI of pressure, also take into account that as of the 15PSI test, the GS5 has already failed.

That being said, yes the commercial did lie to you, but then again what commercial doesn't tell you the whole truth. Next time you watch/see the commercial, look for the fine print that you'll see of most every commercial.

 

[Soc1e7y]

Re: Water Damaged S5 was NOT Covered by Verizon!

BOOM! I respect that mods response to the tee! great mod, great opinion, as as an american I do see how that appealed to the crowd in negative fashion. I certainly could have left that out lol

 

[BrainSmashR]

Re: water resistant my bottom

What, may I ask, does IP67 mean, then? Nobody claimed it was "waterproof".

Posted via Android Central App

7- Immersion up to 1 m Ingress of water in harmful quantity shall not be possible when the enclosure is immersed in water (here's the part where you should really pay attention) under defined conditions of pressure and time (up to 1 m of submersion).

In laymen's terms: In a laboratory, under very specific conditions, this phone is water resistant.

 

[dpham00]

Re: Water Damaged S5 was NOT Covered by Verizon!

If purchased with your American express card (or select other cards) , the water damage might be covered under its purchase protection if it happened within 90 days of purchase .

Also, I have a gear fit which is also ip67.I have run it under the faucet a number of times without issue. But if it were to get water damage, I would not blame Samsung. If within 90 days, I would attempt a claim with American express. If not, I would just accept the loss.

Sent from my Verizon Samsung Galaxy Note 3

 

[Paul627g]

Re: Water Damaged S5 was NOT Covered by Verizon!

BOOM! I respect that mods response to the tee! great mod, great opinion, as as an american I do see how that appealed to the crowd in negative fashion. I certainly could have left that out lol

No problem! Hey it happens every day everywhere you look. People are unfortunately misinformed, misguided and in SOME cases expect to be able to game the system.

That is why we are here to help educate and inform people so they don't have to go through these unpleasant times finding out the hard way

 

[mjcecil]

Re: Water Damaged S5 was NOT Covered by Verizon!

I think other people have hit this in various ways: Simply put, the phone is NOT an underwater or watersports (hehe) phone/camera, and intentionally using it as such is not a good idea, nor is it stated by Verizon or Samsung that this is supported or approved usage. The device is advertised as water resistant only, intended to resist water penetration by dust, rain, splashes and BRIEF accidental drops into liquid. I think this is made pretty clear in Samsung's "life happens" ads.

The IP67 rating, which is published and available to all consumers, is the ONLY commitment that Samsung makes to the watertightness of the device. And that rating assumes a static device. That is, the device may be powered up, but the phone buttons are not actuated, flaps are not pulled on, adjusted, etc., during testing. The unit is tested by immersing (after properly sealing applicable openings, such as the usb port) to not more than 1 meter for 30 minutes, then the unit is removed from the liquid, -dried off-, and tested for functionality.

In other words, if you tell Verizon or Samsung that you actually USED the phone while it was wet, you're not going to get a lot of sympathy, and I'm not sure you're going have a lot of leg to stand on in arguing that point.

 

[Relgoshan]

Re: Water Damaged S5 was NOT Covered by Verizon!

...and claims that sales people wince at when asked to uphold.

How is the sony phone?

Barely heard about it period. Must be real popular. If we get a real one it'll be like walking into Mens Wearhouse...dare try something on and they'll throw a cup of water at you or pull out a squirtgun :/

No company would pass a chance to show off wireless charge and waterproof with some special in store display. I barely even have hope for the wireless charge these days...

 

[disneyf1]

Re: Water Damaged S5 was NOT Covered by Verizon!

Hey guys,

I've been busy through this morning so I haven't had a chance to read or reply, but ...wow. This is a great debate. I really love seeing the multiple takes on this thought. Very eye opening for me and I appreciate the viewpoints.

It looks like the basic pivot point here is perception and expectation. Checking some of the other submissions on this subject around the web, there is a huge grey area of expectation for this device swimming between two schools of thought:

1) No electronic device, no matter what the presented ability, should be exposed to any kind of moisture.

2) If a device is promoted to have certain abilities, it should.

The intermingling grey area exists because of what I have seen as a hugely inconsistent user experience. There are SO many user submissions out there with exceptional water use and not many with water damage (maybe because they are afraid if being called stupid), but enough to be representative. One note above mentioned legal action and I have actually been approached by an attorney who would love apparently love to start a class action, should have seen that coming.

The problem in having Verizon or Samsung support any incident is that the presented ability's limits are are such that no parameters are able to be applied as a test for coverage. They have really opened a can of worms it seems. Thinking back on when the Samsung rep told me to send in my phone so their techs could try and see how long it had been under water (but not how deep), I realize they have no coverage test in place. Someone way up in marketing won the battle in the boardroom over the poor rational schmucks knowing how it would end. Oddly, Samsung has not put any catch all disclaimer in its ads:
Samsung releases new Galaxy S5 commercial, focuses on water resistance and fitness tracking | Android Central

Funny that the new S5 Active DOES have a disclaimer in the commercial, which is actually more of disclaimer itself:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhoEEkk91ic

Odd, though, the Active disclaimer notes submersible to 3ft for 30 min, the same rating as our S5!

 

[disneyf1]

Re: Water Damaged S5 was NOT Covered by Verizon!

Well, being curious, I did a quick search and within a minute found three incidents of S5 Active water damage.

 

[BrainSmashR]

Re: Water Damaged S5 was NOT Covered by Verizon!

11 or so seconds into the commercial the narrator states "Stands up to most everything...within reason".

So now the question becomes "Is it reasonable to expect your electronic device to survive a pressurized water blast from the faucet or being completely submerged under water"....I say no.

 

[pappy53]

Re: Water Damaged S5 was NOT Covered by Verizon!

Too bad when you call apple they want to charge you money to read a script to you while talking down to you with a superior attitude. They think they make a flawless product and are not in any way useful. I cant comment on an Apple store as the nearest is 200 plus miles away.

Posted via Android Central App

Absolutely untrue. Apple is continuously rated number one in customer service every year.

 

[mbar9607]

Absolutely untrue. Apple is continuously rated number one in customer service every year.

I agree and my local apple store is awesome unlike Verizon or motorola unless you know someone I've only dealt with Samsung for a TV and I wasnt impressed with their cs so I can see where pappy53 is coming from

 

[disneyf1]

Re: Water Damaged S5 was NOT Covered by Verizon!

11 or so seconds into the commercial the narrator states "Stands up to most everything...within reason".

So now the question becomes "Is it reasonable to expect your electronic device to survive a pressurized water blast from the faucet or being completely submerged under water"....I say no.

Hey BSR,

Exactly. That's why I commented that the entire commercial is a disclaimer. Pretty funny, really.

I understand why you say 'no' as your perception of a reasonable expectation. This is where they have dropped the ball. Too many differing expectations set up by advertising and sales pitches.

Expectations are formed by experience, trust and information. My experience with the DNA showed some products could withstand water exposure. At the time of purchase I could not find any evidence of water damage problems on the internet for the S5. It's interesting that the IP rating apparently, according to a poster, is for lower pressure than a faucet would provide, yet they show one under a faucet. Ditto for dunking, spraying and dropping into water.

I have not had a phone exposed to pressure or deep or prolonged immersion.

Unlike the Sony, though, the Sony promotions for taking pictures underwater with the Xperia. A different set of expectations set up there, for sure. Hmmmmm.

 

[Wildo6882]

Re: Water Damaged S5 was NOT Covered by Verizon!

Absolutely untrue. Apple is continuously rated number one in customer service every year.

I have had nothing but the best service from Apple. I had an issue with an iPhone 5 and the rep I worked with responded quickly to emails, called me back when he said, called me just to check on me to see how things were going, and provided me with a good amount of free stuff. I never, not once, thought that Apple was just reading off of a script or talking down to me with some elitist attitude. Also when I purchased an iPad Mini and Smart Case from Apple for my daughter last year, my wife said I spent too much and wanted me to return it. I called Apple and told them that was why I was returning the product, and they immediately offered to give me the case for free to see if that would keep my sale. I didn't ask for that, they offered it. That's great service, if you ask me. Google has been almost as accommodating, but I still think that my experience dealing with Apple's CS is above and beyond all the rest.

 

[SteveISU]

Re: water resistant my ****

While this is true, if the phone cannot hold up to what Samsung shows on its commercials, that is grounds for legal action.

Makes me think of that scene in Tommy Boy about guarantees.

 

[bigmatt503]

Re: Water Damaged S5 was NOT Covered by Verizon!

I know that it's "water resistant", with that I treat it like any other phone (like a newborn baby) and if it gets wet I'll deal with it.... No chance that I would take my s5 in the pool


Sent from my rooted Verizon galaxy s5

 

[disneyf1]

Re: water resistant my ****

Makes me think of that scene in Tommy Boy about guarantees.

Excellent!! Love that scene.

 

[Relgoshan]

Re: Water Damaged S5 was NOT Covered by Verizon!

You have to keep in mind, there's not much of a pressure difference in 1 meter of water. It's not even a half atmospheric difference. And these tests are done by simply submerging the item in STILL water. When you add a faucet to the mix, you're talking about running/moving water that's hitting at a much higher pressure than one would face in 1 meter of still water. It's simply 2 different things, but I get the point you're attempting to make.

By water resistant, in a practical environment, the phone is really only meant to be splashed indirectly, dripped on by sweat or a drink at the bar or something subtle like that. It's NOT meant for you to drive into a pool and shoot videos, or send a text while scuba diving off the side of a boat. It's made for general practical "oh no my phone got wet" type scenarios. If you wanted a waterproof phone, well you simply made a bad purchase because this phone is not that to that extent.



Water RESISTANT. And when handled CAREFULLY it's fine. You should definitely check your seals first. I've even heard a few people talking about adding some "umph" to their seals with the addition of silicon caulking. But just because a commercial does something, doesn't mean the consumer should.

Never caulk a phone, the volatile solvents can damage plastics inside the body. I do not know why people keep repeating the rest which has been covered already.

While this is true, if the phone cannot hold up to what Samsung shows on its commercials, that is grounds for legal action.

In the EU, yes. In America, generally no. If you stick a few lines of text in the bottom of the last 5sec of footage you could probably get away with water beds that drown people.

For those of you who do not know how Ingress Protection (IP) testing works in regards to water, the devices begins by having water droplets dropped onto the phone at various angles including the front, back, and sides. This goes on for a few minutes, they then check to see if water has impeded the device and if the device is still correctly working. Following that, the device is then mildly splashed with water, often similarly to that of someone jumping into a pool and splashing those standing along the sides. If the device passes that, the device is submerged into still water. First it's a quick in and out, then a 1minute in and out, and it continues until it surpasses the 30minute mark.
The fact that the device is ONLY rated for "up to 30min" fully submerged in water, tells you the seals simple NOT the best and at most, the device was really on designed to be occassionally splashed, MAYBE dropped into a kitchen sink every once in a while, and since apparently so many people text and Social network from the bathroom they made it able to withstand the occassional surprise dip with your "doo". Not made to go swimming with you
The other side of the argument is the jets test, now obviously if the device's seals aren't strong enough to withstand more than 30min submerged in water, it's typically safe to assume the jets test will demolish the device (which is what we see happening). If memory serves me, the first test is roughly 15PSI, then it increases to 30PSI and on and on. NOW keep in mind the AVERAGE faucet is roughly 60PSI of pressure, also take into account that as of the 15PSI test, the GS5 has already failed.

That being said, yes the commercial did lie to you, but then again what commercial doesn't tell you the whole truth. Next time you watch/see the commercial, look for the fine print that you'll see of most every commercial.

Thanks for posting the spec

I have had nothing but the best service from Apple. I had an issue with an iPhone 5 and the rep I worked with responded quickly to emails, called me back when he said, called me just to check on me to see how things were going, and provided me with a good amount of free stuff. I never, not once, thought that Apple was just reading off of a script or talking down to me with some elitist attitude. Also when I purchased an iPad Mini and Smart Case from Apple for my daughter last year, my wife said I spent too much and wanted me to return it. I called Apple and told them that was why I was returning the product, and they immediately offered to give me the case for free to see if that would keep my sale. I didn't ask for that, they offered it. That's great service, if you ask me. Google has been almost as accommodating, but I still think that my experience dealing with Apple's CS is above and beyond all the rest.

Some things they do are great, some less so. Most of my issues about how their service works is more related to problems caused by their designs, so I agree that especially with AppleCare you get some of the best coverage on any phone or tablet out there. There are people saying they would pay $600+ for an Android tablet with that kind of coverage...

In America we are in fact acclimated to low prices, free refills, free replacements, top shelf specs, customer service and tipping. But that is slowly changing and it is probably a necessary change. However I have been told this is not the place for rude, abusive and targeted speech. And I would like to have faith that these standards are upheld by everyone.

 

[theonlybuster]

Re: Water Damaged S5 was NOT Covered by Verizon!

Never caulk a phone, the volatile solvents can damage plastics inside the body. I do not know why people keep repeating the rest which has been covered already.

Though I understand where you're coming from, IF I take this route, I'm planning on using a pure silicon-type caulk as apposed to something petroleum based. And yes, I know the potential dangers of certain caulks around plastics and rubbers. A silicon-based caulk would not be damaging, as long as it does not contain any petroleum.

 

[Relgoshan]

Re: Water Damaged S5 was NOT Covered by Verizon!

Though I understand where you're coming from, IF I take this route, I'm planning on using a pure silicon-type caulk as apposed to something petroleum based. And yes, I know the potential dangers of certain caulks around plastics and rubbers. A silicon-based caulk would not be damaging, as long as it does not contain any petroleum.

Well good luck there.