(Post title)

  • SGG@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    There’s always a trade off when it comes to any device.

    Fast or slow, lots of features or basic, cheap or expensive, thin/stylish or ruggedized, water or other ingress resistant standards. All of these have to be weighted against each other.

    Also what constitutes a drop? 4 feet, 40 feet, 400? (sorry if I turned on anyone with a foot fetish)

    It is absolutely possible to create a mobile phone with most features people want that survives multiple 4 foot high drops, but it will be encased in a few cm of rubber, the touch screen will be under a noticeable screen protector, and reception might suffer a bit, and it won’t have wireless charging unless you’re ok if that stops working after a unlucky drop. It will also probably be expensive, even more so if you then want to use more premium materials in order to try and slim it down some.

    • RisingSwell@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      I mean, my mobile phone was like 350aud, has survived literally dozens of drops from 4ft+, on a variety of surfaces from carpet and lino to gravel, concrete and bitumen. Literally every function of the phone works fine and there’s no case, just a screen protector. It didn’t come with wireless charging so I don’t know how fragile that would be, but current phones are tough as shit.

      The chassis of my phone is dented and smashed in dozens of places and everything it could do new it can do now just the same, except for looking pretty.

  • CobblerScholar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Humans will break anything and everything that we use regardless of size shape or function just depends on how fast. Long as every piece is replaceable and repairable then it doesn’t matter if it breaks

    • Mr Fish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools.

      • SGG@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        There’s a constant race between inventors and the universe. Inventors are trying to create idiot proof devices, and the universe is creating better idiots.

        The universe is winning.

        • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Is dropping a smartphone from a standing height the work of an idiot? Sounds like something a smartphone designer might say, but I think OPs point is valid. Don’t even get me started on cases. Eventually history will look at smartphone cases the way we look at plastic on furniture from the 50s.

    • JamesTBagg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Hmm… maybe. You should look up East German Superfest glass. Big dishware producers refused to use it because it meant not selling replacement dishes.

      Though, OP’s argument is just dumb.

  • Signtist@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    I agree that there should be phones that prioritize sturdiness for clumsy people, but I see things like sturdiness and waterproof capabilities used as an excuse to get rid of useful features, and I don’t like it. I’ve had cell phones for over 2 decades, and I’ve never dropped one; having an SD card slot and headphone jack is much more important to me than durability, since I rarely hold it over water, and always make sure to keep a solid grip regardless of the circumstances.