screen durability on high-priced phones

Cyrus Afzali wrote:
> Why is it that in so many cases, you pay a good price for a phone
> and,
> while it performs as advertised, in no time flat, the screen gets
> scratched though no fault of anyone?

My phone is over 5 years old and still looks like new. There are
static cling plastic covers for the screen, plus I have the phone in a
leather case, so it seems to me "someone" is at fault..

Tom J

---

› See More: screen durability on high-priced phones

On Jun 28, 2007, Tom J wrote:

> Cyrus Afzali wrote:
>> Why is it that in so many cases, you pay a good price for a phone
>> and,
>> while it performs as advertised, in no time flat, the screen gets
>> scratched though no fault of anyone?
>
> My phone is over 5 years old and still looks like new. There are
> static cling plastic covers for the screen, plus I have the phone in a
> leather case, so it seems to me "someone" is at fault..
>
> Tom J
>
>

I had to invest in screen protecters early on, when premature signs of
scratching appeared. Every phone I've had since then has had some form of
protection on the screen. The cling covers are the best.

--
Joey Dee from NYC

Remember: It is To Laugh

Joey Dee from NYC wrote:
> On Jun 28, 2007, Tom J wrote:
>
>> Cyrus Afzali wrote:
>>> Why is it that in so many cases, you pay a good price for a phone
>>> and,
>>> while it performs as advertised, in no time flat, the screen gets
>>> scratched though no fault of anyone?
>>
>> My phone is over 5 years old and still looks like new. There are
>> static cling plastic covers for the screen, plus I have the phone
>> in
>> a leather case, so it seems to me "someone" is at fault..
>>
>> Tom J
>>
>>
>
> I had to invest in screen protecters early on, when premature signs
> of
> scratching appeared. Every phone I've had since then has had some
> form of protection on the screen. The cling covers are the best.

It may be a little off topic, but it's wise to also put the cling
cover on the screen of your digital cameras or anything else that has
a plastic screen.

Tom J

In article <[email protected]>, Cyrus Afzali
<[email protected]> wrote:

> It seems baffling to me that they can't do any better than this and/or
> won't when, by the time you account for carrier subsidies and what the
> user pays, they're getting $400-$500 a pop for these things.

If this is an iPhone slam, the screen is glass and not plastic.

["Followup-To:" header set to alt.cellular.]
On 2007-06-29, Randall Ainsworth <[email protected]> wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, Cyrus Afzali
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> It seems baffling to me that they can't do any better than this and/or
>> won't when, by the time you account for carrier subsidies and what the
>> user pays, they're getting $400-$500 a pop for these things.
>
> If this is an iPhone slam, the screen is glass and not plastic.

Ain't just the iPhone.

I love my Motorola PEBL, but the screen is a fingerprint and dust magnet.

-= Hawk =- wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 12:41:54 -0400, Cyrus Afzali <[email protected]>
> scribbled:
>
>> On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 01:09:09 -0400, -= Hawk =-
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 22:42:03 -0400, Cyrus Afzali
>>> <[email protected]>
>>> scribbled:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 19:09:21 GMT, "Tom J"
>>>> <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Cyrus Afzali wrote:
>>>>>> Why is it that in so many cases, you pay a good price for a
>>>>>> phone
>>>>>> and,
>>>>>> while it performs as advertised, in no time flat, the screen
>>>>>> gets
>>>>>> scratched though no fault of anyone?
>>>>>
>>>>> My phone is over 5 years old and still looks like new. There are
>>>>> static cling plastic covers for the screen, plus I have the
>>>>> phone
>>>>> in a leather case, so it seems to me "someone" is at fault..
>>>>
>>>> You may believe that, and that's your prerogative. I don't damage
>>>> my stuff and always made things last. The fact that your phone is
>>>> five years old and still looks like new is anecdotal. People that
>>>> have business-class devices that cost hundreds with subsidies
>>>> have
>>>> a right to expect them not to get tiny scratches on them from
>>>> wiping away perspiration that comes from one's face.
>>>
>>> Don't wipe delicate devices with abrasive cloth. That includes
>>> most
>>> paper towels and napkins. If you don't damage your stuff and no
>>> one
>>> else is borrowing it to use as a hockey puck or door stop then the
>>> only possible thing is you've got gremlins.... or you're damaging
>>> your stuff and denying it...
>>
>>
>> Oh, for the love of God, people aren't always going to have a
>> cheese
>> cloth to wipe a screen with. If they can't make the things to be
>> durable enough to be wiped with a shirt or something similar, then
>> that's making crap.
>
> No, that's irresponsible handling of your possessions. If you know
> or
> think what you're about to clean your screen off with will scratch
> it,
> free hint, don't use that and wait until you can use something you
> won't damage your phone with.
>
>> I love how there are always those that try to explain away things
>> that shouldn't exist in the first place. If you put all your
>> innovation in
>
> I love how people refuse to take personal responsibility for their
> actions. "It's the manufacturer's fault *I* scratched my screen!"
>
>> the guts and neglect stupid little things like having a durable
>> screen, that shows poor planning. That would be like having a
>> speedy
>> roadster whose tires were built to disintegrate once the car hit
>> 80.
>
> No, it'd be nothing like that at all.

It's rather amusing that he mentioned the speedy roadster. He'll be
complaining about it sooner or later, when he doesn't keep those
plastic headlamp & tail lamp lens polished and they start discoloring
and cracking. :-(
My neighbor has that very complaint, because his vehicle is 1/2 the
age of mine and his headlight lens are cloudy and mine are still
crystal clear.

Tom J

["Followup-To:" header set to alt.cellular.]
On 2007-06-29, Cyrus Afzali <[email protected]> wrote:

> I just can't believe how much we put up with poor design and
> implementation and think we're getting gold. But then the U.S. hasn't
> truly innovated, outside of the personal computer sector and telecom
> sector, in decades.

Or inside those sectors, either. At least not telecom

> We milk a cow until it falls over and dies and

**cough**telcos**cough**copper phone lines**cough** but that's veering way
offtopic

At 30 Jun 2007 00:56:42 -0400 -= Hawk =- wrote:

> You don't think you should have to take responsiblity for the way you
> care for your possessions. We've established that. You want to blame
> others for your problems. We've established that.


Oh please, a product, particularly a portable one, needs to have "typical
use" factored into the design. Wiping the screen of a PDA screen on a
shirt is certainly a typical use- it's not like he's wiping a zoom lens
with a burlap sack. My Pocket PCs take a wiping with shirt cloth without
a problem, but my Nokia 3650 Symbian phone's screen would scratch if you
looked at it crosseyed. I don't recall it's owners manual demanding I
use lens paper to wipe it, either.

> >Comparing that kind of behavior with roof damage from a storm is so
> >beyond laughable, it's nuts. But then again, I'm not surprised.
>
> As good as comparing it to a sports car who's tires fall off at 80
> mph....

At last some common ground- you both used crappy analogies!


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Jun 29, 2007, Cyrus Afzali wrote:

> If wiping a screen with a cotton shirt damages it, then it's poorly
> made.

Fer cryin' out loud, guys. This is a valid point. Most "dedicated" (sorry: I
couldn't think of a better word) screen wipes are made of cotton anyway.
Maybe a really fine weave, but still...

It's a natural thing to do: You're out on the street on a call, you end the
call, the screen is moist from sweat, you wipe it - gently, of course - on
your sleeve or some other part of your cotton shirt, to dry.

I think a lot of people do this. (I said "I think," so don't ask for
documentation. :-)

To have the screen scratch as a result of this -- as opposed to a dedicated
screen wipe that is likely made of the same fabric -- is silly. Chances are,
the dedicated wipe will scratch the screen too, sooner or later.

Some screens are better at resisting scratches than others; my Treo does
pretty well in that regard, the T/X is even better, but I keep a screen
protector on them anyway because I drop them into my pocket sometimes.

It would just be nice if more thought went into the manufacture of those
screens that are more highly susceptible.

--
Joey Dee from NYC

Remember: It is To Laugh

"Cyrus Afzali" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Motorola was the initial darling of the cell phone industry, with its
> StarTac line of phones, but soon they found they were getting their
> ass kicked by Nokia because they had a bad user interface and lower
> quality.

You must admit they've done alright with the RAZR. I've dropped mine
numerous times, and it just keeps on truckin'.
--
John Richards

"-= Hawk =-" <[email protected]> wrote in message newsgob83ln55ptrgv1i66k3ioq7afbn7veba@news-server...
> On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 23:19:07 -0400, Cyrus Afzali <[email protected]>
> scribbled:
>>If wiping a screen with a cotton shirt damages it, then it's poorly
>>made. Again, you may wish to carry around something to specifically
>>clean the surface of a PDA, but I don't and I don't think I should
>>have to.
>
> You don't think you should have to take responsiblity for the way you
> care for your possessions. We've established that. You want to blame
> others for your problems. We've established that.

I have to agree with Cyrus, wiping a phone screen on one's cotton shirt is
a common practice, and certainly one that the manufacturer could foresee
as a common practice.
--
John Richards

John Richards wrote:

> "-= Hawk =-" <[email protected]> wrote in message newsgob83ln55ptrgv1i66k3ioq7afbn7veba@news-server...
>
>>On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 23:19:07 -0400, Cyrus Afzali <[email protected]>
>>scribbled:
>>
>>>If wiping a screen with a cotton shirt damages it, then it's poorly
>>>made. Again, you may wish to carry around something to specifically
>>>clean the surface of a PDA, but I don't and I don't think I should
>>>have to.
>>
>>You don't think you should have to take responsiblity for the way you
>>care for your possessions. We've established that. You want to blame
>>others for your problems. We've established that.
>
>
> I have to agree with Cyrus, wiping a phone screen on one's cotton shirt is
> a common practice, and certainly one that the manufacturer could foresee
> as a common practice.



"Bubble Boy" Hawk thinks living behind a barrier is the norm.

Not exactly.