Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Samsung's folding phone breaks for reviewers

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 199 posts

Re: Samsung's folding phone breaks for reviewers

#21

Post by jsiepkes »

Traubenfuchs wrote: post #18

This is the direct result of rushing to offer something that can be called innovation after years of a draught. But foldable phones are as much a gimmick as 3D cameras. Phone innovation is indeed dead -for the customer, that's ok, but for the vendors it's a nightmare.

After Royole came with the first bendable screens there has been a tremendous pressure among the big players like Samsung and LG to display their technological superiority with bendable stuff. Problem is they are simply not as far as Royole at the moment.

Re: Samsung's folding phone breaks for reviewers

#22

Post by serpix »

hliyan wrote: post #2

Most cases seem to be due to users mistakenly removing the permanent screen protection layer. The company claims that the foldable screen has been tested for 200,000 folds -- i.e. about 5 years of rigorous use.

I wonder if they bothered to test it with some sand on it and in freezing conditions / variable conditions.

Re: Samsung's folding phone breaks for reviewers

#23

Post by chrischen »

hliyan wrote: post #2

Most cases seem to be due to users mistakenly removing the permanent screen protection layer. The company claims that the foldable screen has been tested for 200,000 folds -- i.e. about 5 years of rigorous use.

This may be a case of cultural differences... a lot of Asian people like to leave those plastic protectors on!

Re: Samsung's folding phone breaks for reviewers

#24

Post by Someone »

My guess: that “film that went over the screen” is there because Samsung discovered that, in one’s pocket, pressure on the outside of the device decreases the radius of the device below its bend radius (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bend_radius).

The units reviewers have may be early versions with that extra film. That would explain why Mark Gurman wrote ”It appeared removable in the left corner“.

Re: Samsung's folding phone breaks for reviewers

#25

Post by [deleted] »

onion2k wrote: post #13
hliyan wrote: post #2

Most cases seem to be due to users mistakenly removing the permanent screen protection layer. The company claims that the foldable screen has been tested for 200,000 folds -- i.e. about 5 years of rigorous use.

Most cases seem to be due to users mistakenly removing the permanent screen protection layer. Let's not push blame on to the user. If the screen protection is so vital that the screen will fail within a day without it, then the problem is that the screen protection is removable and to easy to remove.

[deleted]

Re: Samsung's folding phone breaks for reviewers

#26

Post by burgerzzz »

tooltalk wrote: post #20
Traubenfuchs wrote: post #18

This is the direct result of rushing to offer something that can be called innovation after years of a draught. But foldable phones are as much a gimmick as 3D cameras. Phone innovation is indeed dead -for the customer, that's ok, but for the vendors it's a nightmare.

This is obviously an early adopter edition of fairly interesting, futuristic product -- Samsung is likewise releasing it in limited quantity by reservation only. It's only gimmicky as phablets that many had denounced years ago.

I don't see how this not a flip phone with a screen on both ends?

Re: Samsung's folding phone breaks for reviewers

#27

Post by majewsky »

tooltalk wrote: post #20
Traubenfuchs wrote: post #18

This is the direct result of rushing to offer something that can be called innovation after years of a draught. But foldable phones are as much a gimmick as 3D cameras. Phone innovation is indeed dead -for the customer, that's ok, but for the vendors it's a nightmare.

This is obviously an early adopter edition of fairly interesting, futuristic product -- Samsung is likewise releasing it in limited quantity by reservation only. It's only gimmicky as phablets that many had denounced years ago.

> It's only gimmicky as phablets that many had denounced years ago.

I still want a compact flagship phone.

Re: Samsung's folding phone breaks for reviewers

#28

Post by dagw »

majewsky wrote: post #27
tooltalk wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is obviously an early adopter edition of fairly interesting, futuristic product -- Samsung is likewise releasing it in limited quantity by reservation only. It's only gimmicky as phablets that many had denounced years ago.

> It's only gimmicky as phablets that many had denounced years ago. I still want a compact flagship phone.

Sony and Samsung tried a few years ago. It seems no one bought them.

Re: Samsung's folding phone breaks for reviewers

#29

Post by NLips »

reallymental wrote: post #17

Let's assume that they knew this was a half baked product. Not a "first edition" product like the first iPhone, but a rushed, half baked product, released without consideration of sales but just for being the first in the market for this niche. Given this assumption, why would you give it to reviewers at all ? Remember "Vertu" ? They were the Ferrari of phones during the Blackberry era and were _shit_. I got my hands…

Vertus were always intended as ostentatious, bling products, rather than fantastic phones. They were mid-range models covered in gold and diamonds etc.

A Ferrari is meant to be ostentatious _and_ a great car (not withstanding pratcicality or cost).

Post reply on HN