Pixel will be IP53 rated

[Rocky5000100]

Google's Pixel phones will be IP53 rated, meaning no dunking your Pixel or hosing it down

Sad if true. Was hoping for IP67.

I've survived the last 6 years with Galaxy smartphones (S1, S3, N4) and never having a submersion incident, so I'll just have to keep being careful!

 

[Law2138]

Google's Pixel phones will be IP53 rated, meaning no dunking your Pixel or hosing it down

Sad if true. Was hoping for IP67.

I've survived the last 6 years with Galaxy smartphones (S1, S3, N4) and never having a submersion incident, so I'll just have to keep being careful!

This too is disappointing. Moto devices have some sort of nano-coating to help with water resistance. Samsung and Apple's flagships have some type of protection against accidental dunks - IP67 or IP68.

While many 2016 devices aren't water resistant, they aren't premium flagships with a hefty price either. Google needs to realize that people ARE going to get their phones splashed and accidentally drop them in water. Cameras across the board are way better and people want to take photos wherever they go.

This will make me take an even closer look at the accidental drop/damage protection that Google will offer.

 

[soma4society]

Google's Pixel phones will be IP53 rated, meaning no dunking your Pixel or hosing it down

Sad if true. Was hoping for IP67.

I've survived the last 6 years with Galaxy smartphones (S1, S3, N4) and never having a submersion incident, so I'll just have to keep being careful!

This, if accurate, is certainly an inauspicious start down the road of justifying the new premium phone price tag we're supposed to be dealing with...

I think this whole undertaking is moving in what seems to be the wrong direction. People are getting a bit more used to very solid phones that are cheaper, not phones that are just marginally better than that being a *lot* more.

But hey it's still all just guesswork until October 4...

 

[chin chen]

I hoped it was ip67 or ip68. Other than the Galaxy, you dont have much choice in this department, which is disappointing. But the Htc 10 is also just ip53, so it was kind of expected. For once i hoped for a complete package, but no.

 

[griff7774]

IP 67or IP68 would be great but not necessary. Water is a part of my work life and never had and incident or accident with my current device or previous one

 

[Ultrapale]

I'm not overly concerned either. I've never had an issue with water. I do a pretty good job of protecting it, or putting the right case on for different situations. It would be nice to have a different rating, but not a deal breaker for me.

 

[Ry]

This too is disappointing. Moto devices have some sort of nano-coating to help with water resistance. Samsung and Apple's flagships have some type of protection against accidental dunks - IP67 or IP68.

While many 2016 devices aren't water resistant, they aren't premium flagships with a hefty price either. Google needs to realize that people ARE going to get their phones splashed and accidentally drop them in water. Cameras across the board are way better and people want to take photos wherever they go.

This will make me take an even closer look at the accidental drop/damage protection that Google will offer.

To be fair, Motorola's "nano-coating" means nothing since it's not actually rated by an outside agency.

 

[Law2138]

To be fair, Motorola's "nano-coating" means nothing since it's not actually rated by an outside agency.

On the contrary, why would a manufacturer advertise something that means nothing? I've never tested it myself, but there are plenty of dunk tests with nano-coated Moto X devices that come out of the water just fine.

We've seen IP68 devices fall short of water resistance (and I've experienced it first-hand) this year as well.

IP67 and IP68 doesnt mean more to me than nano-coating does. For me, what it boils down to is this. The manufacturer either makes an attempt to protect the device from spills, accidental dunks, and moisture or they don't.

If this IP53 rumor is true, Google did not.

 

[Ry]

On the contrary, why would a manufacturer advertise something that means nothing? I've never tested it myself, but there are plenty of dunk tests with nano-coated Moto X devices that come out of the water just fine.

We've seen IP68 devices fall short of water resistance (and I've experienced it first-hand) this year as well.

IP67 and IP68 doesnt mean more to me than nano-coating does. For me, what it boils down to is this. The manufacturer either makes an attempt to protect the device from spills, accidental dunks, and moisture or they don't.

If this IP53 rumor is true, Google did not.

No rating against water/liquid means I will still try to protect it as much as possible.

For me, the rating means it was tested.

These "nano-coated" Motorolas should probably be rated at least IPX4 (liquid ingress 4 = Splashing of water) since they're saying it'll be safe from splashes, right?

But with no official rating, I'm treating it like it has no protection.

(even still you probably shouldn't dunk an IPX7/IPX8 phone on purpose anyway)

 

[LailaAK]

Why aren't all smartphones IP67 or better? Maybe I'm biased because I live in an area that sees rain over 176 days or more per year on average... not being able to use the phone while it's raining is just silly.

 

[EnemiesInTheEnd]

It is nice to have a phone with a water resistance rating, but rarely necessary. Most modern phones can survive submersion in water for several minutes or more.

 

[VitaminA]

In my opinion, the water resistance rating is for peace of mind only...which is still a great thing. But, don't most phones still have a clause in their warranties that specifically states they don't cover water damage, even if they're IP67 or IP68?

 

[raqball]

Yup.. Even the *mighty (*sarcasm intended with that word) iPhone 7 has a clause. Get it wet and you are outta luck AND outta warranty...

 

[VitaminA]

Exactly. Still nice to "know" that your phone CAN survive the water; but defeats the purpose if there's not protection IF it doesn't.