6 ms·

My old Samsung Galaxy S4 was water proof and had a removable battery. At least, it was waterproof enough to be able to answer a call in the shower, if need be.

My old Samsung Galaxy S4 was water proof and had a removable battery. At least, it was waterproof enough to be able to answer a call in the shower, if need be. I never fully submerged the phone, but casual exposure to water was absolutely fine. Oh, and it had O-rings around the edge of the battery cover. It was a pretty great phone. Its downfall was being too thin. It didn't fit great in my pocket and it ended up getting bent when I sat down. Didn't break the phone, but was enough to leave aermanent bend in the phone about 3/4 of an inch from the top and a little bit of delamination in the one corner. Even with the bend, I kept the phone for quite a while before it finally met its demise falling out of a coat pocket onto asphalt exiting a car.

mlyle 4y ago
Galaxy S4: 136.60 x 69.80 x 7.90mm -- 75.3 cm^3 -- 68 cm^2 screen, volume to screen area ratio 1.10 cm. IP67, 1m 30 minutes (AKA don't really immerse this-- even if you drop it in a puddle it may not be OK). iPhone 13 Mini: 131.5 x 64.2 x 7.65mm -- 64.6 cm^3 -- 72 cm^2 screen, volume to screen area ratio 0.9 cm. IP68, maximum depth 6m 30 minutes (AKA brief immersion in depths of less than a couple meters is OK). There's a reason why all these adhesives are used everywhere.
- Dylan16807 4y ago
  There are bezels on the top and bottom because the S4 came out in 2013, not because of the waterproofing method. IP67 is enough for me, and I will happily trade .3mm of thickness for a removable battery. Not that we should assume that IP68 has to be sacrificed. There aren't a lot of comparison points on that specific attribute. A Galaxy Xcover Pro is bulky but that's because it's much more ruggedized in general.
  - mlyle 4y ago
    > There are bezels on the top and bottom because the S4 came out in 2013, not because of the waterproofing method. There are bezels on the top and bottom because older phones were less volume efficient than they are today-- something that is enabled by the use of adhesive. > IP67 is enough for me, and I will happily trade .3mm of thickness for a removable battery. OK, but, I believe the penalty would be significantly more than .3mm, and most people won't.
    - Dylan16807 4y ago
      > There are bezels on the top and bottom because older phones were less volume efficient than they are today-- something that is enabled by the use of adhesive. Adhesive on the front of the phone, where the screen is, is just fine as far as battery removability is concerned. Are you sure that's a real factor in this comparison? > I believe the penalty would be significantly more than .3mm Well I'm trying to use the example you gave... > and most people won't. Citation needed. I've never seen anyone mention sub-millimeter differences in choosing one phone over another.
      - mlyle 4y ago
        > Adhesive on the front of the phone, where the screen is, is just fine as far as battery removability is concerned. Are you sure that's a real factor in this comparison? Adhesive all over the place helps remove volume. So does using annoying connector types, and putting together the parts of the phone in crazy jenga-like assemblies. The reason why phones are less serviceable today is because they are packed tight. This packed-tight characteristic is harder to manufacture, but much harder to service. The reason why it is there is because the designers of the phone think it is necessary to make a phone that is desirable to the market. > Well I'm trying to use the example you gave... OK, so look at total volume vs. screen area, because I think this is really actually the important metric. In less volume, we got basically the same volume of battery and a bigger screen. The metric swung by 20%. > Citation needed. I've never seen anyone mention sub-millimeter differences in choosing one phone over another. Phones with replaceable batteries didn't do very well versus their competition, which is a pretty good hint that the ease of replacing batteries was not the primary buying factor. Phone size-- both thinness and total volume-- and screen size-- are unquestionably important buying factors.

mlyle 4y ago

Galaxy S4: 136.60 x 69.80 x 7.90mm -- 75.3 cm^3 -- 68 cm^2 screen, volume to screen area ratio 1.10 cm. IP67, 1m 30 minutes (AKA don't really immerse this-- even if you drop it in a puddle it may not be OK). iPhone 13 Mini: 131.5 x 64.2 x 7.65mm -- 64.6 cm^3 -- 72 cm^2 screen, volume to screen area ratio 0.9 cm. IP68, maximum depth 6m 30 minutes (AKA brief immersion in depths of less than a couple meters is OK). There's a reason why all these adhesives are used everywhere.

Dylan16807 4y ago
There are bezels on the top and bottom because the S4 came out in 2013, not because of the waterproofing method. IP67 is enough for me, and I will happily trade .3mm of thickness for a removable battery. Not that we should assume that IP68 has to be sacrificed. There aren't a lot of comparison points on that specific attribute. A Galaxy Xcover Pro is bulky but that's because it's much more ruggedized in general.
- mlyle 4y ago
  > There are bezels on the top and bottom because the S4 came out in 2013, not because of the waterproofing method. There are bezels on the top and bottom because older phones were less volume efficient than they are today-- something that is enabled by the use of adhesive. > IP67 is enough for me, and I will happily trade .3mm of thickness for a removable battery. OK, but, I believe the penalty would be significantly more than .3mm, and most people won't.
  - Dylan16807 4y ago
    > There are bezels on the top and bottom because older phones were less volume efficient than they are today-- something that is enabled by the use of adhesive. Adhesive on the front of the phone, where the screen is, is just fine as far as battery removability is concerned. Are you sure that's a real factor in this comparison? > I believe the penalty would be significantly more than .3mm Well I'm trying to use the example you gave... > and most people won't. Citation needed. I've never seen anyone mention sub-millimeter differences in choosing one phone over another.
    - mlyle 4y ago
      > Adhesive on the front of the phone, where the screen is, is just fine as far as battery removability is concerned. Are you sure that's a real factor in this comparison? Adhesive all over the place helps remove volume. So does using annoying connector types, and putting together the parts of the phone in crazy jenga-like assemblies. The reason why phones are less serviceable today is because they are packed tight. This packed-tight characteristic is harder to manufacture, but much harder to service. The reason why it is there is because the designers of the phone think it is necessary to make a phone that is desirable to the market. > Well I'm trying to use the example you gave... OK, so look at total volume vs. screen area, because I think this is really actually the important metric. In less volume, we got basically the same volume of battery and a bigger screen. The metric swung by 20%. > Citation needed. I've never seen anyone mention sub-millimeter differences in choosing one phone over another. Phones with replaceable batteries didn't do very well versus their competition, which is a pretty good hint that the ease of replacing batteries was not the primary buying factor. Phone size-- both thinness and total volume-- and screen size-- are unquestionably important buying factors.