Is waterproofing really that important to you?

[Jeremy8000]

Perhaps I should throw it in my pool. It could boil off the tip couple inches of water and kill any algae so I can close it faster?

Hmm... Samsung could have done a huge humanitarian service by shipping all of their first-run N7's to Florida and the Carolinas to help mitigate the flooding damage from Matthew!

Ok, I'm done, I promise, just had to slip that last one in...

 

[Mick Symons]

A Pixel Pro with a stylus would be awesome! Good call!

 

[rockdrummersrock]

Just an FYI but the Pixel phones actually DO have waterproofing but not to the highest degree.

For me this is a non-issue because people throw around "WATERPROOF" like you can go swim with it or take a shower with it. On the spec sheet the pixels have an IP53 (IP stands for Ingress Protection) rating. The two numbers stand for levels of dust and waterproofing.

5- Dust protected - Ingress of dust is not entirely prevented, but it must not enter in sufficient quantity to interfere with the satisfactory operation of the equipment.

Meaning? Oh no, some dust might end up in your case or in a speaker. Not a huge deal if you ask me. When I bought my first android phone in 2007 I had dust under the screen and it had no IP rating (HTC Evo RIP), never been a problem since. The iPhone has 6 which means it's "dustproof" but I guarantee the ear piece and other parts will get dust all the same. This really isn't of much importance IMO.

3- Spraying water Water falling as a spray at any angle up to 60° from the vertical shall have no harmful effect, utilizing either: a) an oscillating fixture, or b) A spray nozzle with a counterbalanced shield. Test a) is conducted for 5 minutes, then repeated with the specimen tilted 90° for the second 5-minute test. Test b) is conducted (with shield in place) for 5 minutes minimum.

Meaning? Don't take your phone showering with you or into the pool. The highest level of waterproofing protection available on a phone is the 7 the iPhone has but it is limited to 1M of water for 30 minutes. So I still wouldn't take an iPhone swimming or near water. That just happens to be my personal belief for any sort of electronic as well so its not much of a sell point. As long as my phone can with stand the occasional rain drop or being dropped in the snow for a minute then I'm fine with it.

(www.dsmt.com/resources/ip-rating-chart & wikipedia are useful for more info)

 

[Mick Symons]

You're right; it is important to note that the Pixel is not entirely vulnerable to water. I think most people worry about the dreaded phone in the toilet (my wife did that a few years back). Submersion means death without an IP66 or better (on paper, anyway). As for a dust rating of 5, that's kind of ludicrous at this point in the smartphone game. Fair enough, it really doesn't make THAT much of a difference, but when we've seen phones come out this year, all with IP67 ratings, 53 seems like a distinct decline.

Again, though, I totally hear you. I'm of the paradoxical mind that I want the better dust- and waterproofing because I'm paying such a high price, but really at the end of the day what does it matter? Well it matters because these things cost as much as iPhones. Fine, but have you ever gotten a phone wet? Well no, but... And on, and on, and on

 

[rockdrummersrock]

Nah I agree, it just seems like people were making it the end of the world since it didn't have the best of both or in some cases people thought none at all. Accidents happen and it's a case by case sort of thing most of the time. I'd like it sure but it's not a huge deal to me. I learned the hard way back in the days of dumb phones and thankfully havent had any issues since. I'm sure the increased camera awesomeness or the 24/7 support people were paid for by slightly cutting corners on the IP rating.

 

[Mick Symons]

And then some! Haha

 

[JeanRuse]

I agree. I think water resistance is great, but absolute water proofing isn't necessary for my needs. I don't take my phone swimming or have it out during torrential downpours.

 

[jpr196]

While I don't disagree, no reviewer really made it that big of a deal until the iPhone joined the party.

Agreed. This is what frustrates me most. Look at Motorola, who came out with a shatterproof phone last year. Yet, no one is calling for that to be the standard for flagships.

However, I guarantee you if Apple's next Iphone was touted as Shatterproof, that would be the new gold standard that all flagships must follow.

 

[jsgiv]

We all want waterproof phones, and some folks are balking at the Pixel due to its lack of water-resistance, but is that feature really that important to you?

If you have a waterproof phone, how many times have you gotten it wet? I get that it's nice to have in case of emergency, but I've had my own phones for 10 years now and have literally never gotten any of them damagingly wet.

Thoughts?

I don't take my phone swimming, or take a bath with it, or pour champagne all over it so..... no.

Last times where I did get one of my phones wet - I put it in a cup of rice and let it dry for a day... phone still runs to this day... no issues...

Not sure why this is such a big deal... other than the fact other phones have it.. so it's now considered a negative...

How long will it be before we start docking phones negatively in reviews because it still has a headphone jack?

 

[bhatech]

Nice to have but not enough to prevent from buying.

 

[ericotena]

Of course given the price they should've included a waterproof/ water resistant feature.

 

[anon(8328984)]

Not really that important to me. It was kinda nice to have it on my z3, but not a make or break deal.

 

[PhilP72]

It would be great if it had it, but, definitely not a deal breaker for me. Not one water damage incident all the years I've had a cell phone. I hope I didn't just jinx myself, lol. That being said, at this price point now a days, it will probably become the norm.

 

[Joe the Insider]

Waterproof isn't necessary to me.

 

[SystemofaDan]

I've never had a phone that was waterproof, but given the choice between one with and one without.. The pixel isn't cheap, I would have chosen the note 7 over it. Guess I'll have to wait for the Galaxy S (deton)8

 

[codeda]

I've had it on my phones on and off for the last four years so def not a new thing. It has never been a deal breaker for me but I def prefer it and have lost a phone or two in the past to water damage. Was also nice when I had my Galaxy s7 and had a purse explosion of something I could just rinse it without too much worry.

 

[rbi411]

I find waterproofing far more important than dust resistance, but if you're going to sell a phone for that much it better be damn near invincible. IP53 is just kind of pathetic for that price point.

 

[billykac]

OP:
No.

 

[anon(5630457)]

Of course it's important. It's like fire insurance on a house. You may never use it, but you'll be glad you have it if your house burns down. You can be careful with your phone, but accidents are called accidents for a reason.

I'm not purchasing a Pixel because it lacks water resistance.

 

[cary328is]

Impervious