Apple Watch Drop Test - Sports Edition

So the sport version, which is much more likely to suffer an impact, is less durable and uses the worst glass? I see.
 
"you call that durability?" LMFAO

yeah you fucking shithead what do you think happens when you throw glass straight on the ground?!
 
TechRax usually does things to the devices that would never occur in normal use. However, I can imagine falling on pavement while running/jogging/cycling/etc that would be this exact type of use case - the 4 ft drop is very minimal impact. And the Apple Watch Sport is assuredly not going to take that fall well.
 
it "fell" just fine. it shattered when he *slammed* it into the ground face down
 
right, but when it fell off his wrist in the first place the weight of the back kept it falling bottom down. He then intentionally forced it to land flat on its face. There isn't anything that is going to survive that. A strafer faced watch, a plastic faced watch, anything intentionally dropped on its face is going to be damaged and being surprised that glass would shatter from 4 feet, flat onto concrete, is going to shatter and no one should be surprised. That's physics, not shoddy workmanship or materials.

And needless to say, in over four decades of wearing watches I've never dropped one like that off my wrist anyway.
That four foot drop may sound minimal, but if you fall flat on your face or head onto concrete you run a serious risk of killing yourself.
 
The video makes me wonder if this is the first watch he's ever worn in his life.
 
Stupid troll video. How does a watch just fall off your wrist and land directly onto the face? Totally unrealistic. At worst you might scrap the watch face on a wall.
 
atreidesgoldenpath said:
TechRax usually does things to the devices that would never occur in normal use. However, I can imagine falling on pavement while running/jogging/cycling/etc that would be this exact type of use case - the 4 ft drop is very minimal impact. And the Apple Watch Sport is assuredly not going to take that fall well.
Click to expand...

Why would you fall on your face running?


I've run many thousands of miles and haven't fell on my face since about 2 1/2.
 
I'm thinking to get the 42mm sport watch. I currently have a Breitling Chronomat , will it be a worth switch :D .
 
mope54 said:
right, but when it fell off his wrist in the first place the weight of the back kept it falling bottom down. He then intentionally forced it to land flat on its face. There isn't anything that is going to survive that. A strafer faced watch, a plastic faced watch, anything intentionally dropped on its face is going to be damaged and being surprised that glass would shatter from 4 feet, flat onto concrete, is going to shatter and no one should be surprised. That's physics, not shoddy workmanship or materials.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure a plastic screen would have survive a fall without shattering. Must industrial applications still use some kind of plastic screen because they don't shatter. Watchs approved for manned space flights also use plastic screens. Now plastic isn't ideal for consumer devices because they scratch easily and have poorer light transmission.

Anyways I'm still surprised that the Apple Watch Sport shattered so easily. There are tons of drop videos of whole phones being drop on their face and surviving. I would think the Apple Watch with its lower mass would generate less impact and thus survive.
 
gwu168 said:
I'm pretty sure a plastic screen would have survive a fall without shattering. Must industrial applications still use some kind of plastic screen because they don't shatter. Watchs approved for manned space flights also use plastic screens. Now plastic isn't ideal for consumer devices because they scratch easily and have poorer light transmission.

Anyways I'm still surprised that the Apple Watch Sport shattered so easily. There are tons of drop videos of whole phones being drop on their face and surviving. I would think the Apple Watch with its lower mass would generate less impact and thus survive.
Click to expand...


It's 2,000,000 times more likely tat you drop your phone, as, for most people anyway, IT ISNT STRAPPED ON YOUR WRIST WITH A LOCKING MECHANISM.
 
Verge said:
It's 2,000,000 times more likely tat you drop your phone, as, for most people anyway, IT ISNT STRAPPED ON YOUR WRIST WITH A LOCKING MECHANISM.
Click to expand...

First your statement is hyperbolic. Its probably under 500 times more likely to drop a phone than a watch. At minimum you handle the apple watch unstrapped twice a day (probably more if you shower), and most people probably pick up their phone under 100 times a day. Assume handling phone is twice as risky of being dropped than handling a watch (I'm being pretty generous here). Conclusion is that phone is only conservatively 100 times more likely to drop than a watch.

I own a Fitbit charge HR and various other fitness bands and I've dropped them a few times (mostly just knocking them off a stand/table after taking them off), but that is besides the point. The main takeaway is that my fitness bands take a greater amount of physical beat in general compare to my phones, because they're STRAPPED ON MY WRIST WHICH MOVES/SWINGS AROUND AND IS EXPOSED. I sure hope my Apple Watch screen doesn't shatter when I accidentally bump my wrist against a granite/quartz counter top.

Also, the Apple Watch's glass is extremely exposed compare a traditional watches. Most watch designs have the glass recesses or surrounded by a bezel, so direct impact on the glass is unlikely. It will be interesting to see how well the Apple Watch fares in real life situations.
 
Would you go around bumping into shit with a Rolex? Would you be dropping it all the time? Doesn't have to be a Rolex, but that's just the example I'm using since I assume most wouldn't handle it like some fitness accessory. (Fitbit is made so you can sleep with it/workout and is made of all rubber, apples to oranges)
 
One reason I got the Apple Watch was because of the fitness functions. No, I won't be wearing a Rolex while mountain biking, but I'll probably wear my Apple Watch.
 
gwu168 said:
First your statement is hyperbolic. Its probably under 500 times more likely to drop a phone than a watch. At minimum you handle the apple watch unstrapped twice a day (probably more if you shower), and most people probably pick up their phone under 100 times a day. Assume handling phone is twice as risky of being dropped than handling a watch (I'm being pretty generous here). Conclusion is that phone is only conservatively 100 times more likely to drop than a watch.

I own a Fitbit charge HR and various other fitness bands and I've dropped them a few times (mostly just knocking them off a stand/table after taking them off), but that is besides the point. The main takeaway is that my fitness bands take a greater amount of physical beat in general compare to my phones, because they're STRAPPED ON MY WRIST WHICH MOVES/SWINGS AROUND AND IS EXPOSED. I sure hope my Apple Watch screen doesn't shatter when I accidentally bump my wrist against a granite/quartz counter top.

Also, the Apple Watch's glass is extremely exposed compare a traditional watches. Most watch designs have the glass recesses or surrounded by a bezel, so direct impact on the glass is unlikely. It will be interesting to see how well the Apple Watch fares in real life situations.
Click to expand...

That's why you are a Fitbit customer.
 
gwu168 said:
One reason I got the Apple Watch was because of the fitness functions. No, I won't be wearing a Rolex while mountain biking, but I'll probably wear my Apple Watch.
Click to expand...

Why?


Here's no gps function, all you really get is tracking your heart rate, which, for a healthy adventurous adult is pretty meaningless.
 
Verge said:
Why?


Here's no gps function, all you really get is tracking your heart rate, which, for a healthy adventurous adult is pretty meaningless.
Click to expand...

And even for a not healthy adventurous adult....is still pretty meaningless...since most people have no idea what to do with the data other than go "geee whiz". Just about everyone lasers in on what the calorie counter says, which is nothing more than a feel-good random number generator.
 
mope54 said:
it "fell" just fine. it shattered when he *slammed* it into the ground face down
Click to expand...

He didn't actually "slam" or "throw" it at the ground, but whatever.

I've dropped my normal watch onto concrete before and barely a scratch. My guess is the Apple watch is probably significantly heavier.
 
mope54 said:
it "fell" just fine. it shattered when he *slammed* it into the ground face down
Click to expand...

MavericK96 said:
He didn't actually "slam" or "throw" it at the ground, but whatever.

I've dropped my normal watch onto concrete before and barely a scratch. My guess is the Apple watch is probably significantly heavier.
Click to expand...

It's mope he ignores reality and is a staunch apple defender no matter what. To me the video clearly showed no slamming or throwing when it shattered the first time, it was simply the watch turned face down and release. Guaranteed he comes in here guns a blazing saying we are crazy.

Back to the watch itself, sapphire is more brittle than glass so its going to shatter easier, not a surprise, its more scratch resistant than glass though. I'd probably rather have the scratch resistance over the shatter resistance of a watch as i'm not going to be dropping it, but probably rubbing it up against things that could scratch it.
 
munkle said:
It's mope he ignores reality and is a staunch apple defender no matter what. To me the video clearly showed no slamming or throwing when it shattered the first time, it was simply the watch turned face down and release. Guaranteed he comes in here guns a blazing saying we are crazy.

Back to the watch itself, sapphire is more brittle than glass so its going to shatter easier, not a surprise, its more scratch resistant than glass though. I'd probably rather have the scratch resistance over the shatter resistance of a watch as i'm not going to be dropping it, but probably rubbing it up against things that could scratch it.
Click to expand...

I think you are still missing the point.

Apple doesn't sit around and design things to prevent against owners dropping their equipment or slamming their arms into a granit countertop(who does this? How uncoordinated are these "adults").

They design it to withstand very minor contact because it should be on your wrist. If you want something rugged and able to do so, don't buy an apple product, you are NOT their demographic.
 
Verge said:
I think you are still missing the point.

Apple doesn't sit around and design things to prevent against owners dropping their equipment or slamming their arms into a granit countertop(who does this? How uncoordinated are these "adults").

They design it to withstand very minor contact because it should be on your wrist. If you want something rugged and able to do so, don't buy an apple product, you are NOT their demographic.
Click to expand...

What point am I missing? I just stated the differences of sapphire and glass. Apple actively chose sapphire over glass (I hope they didn't even consider plastic) because it is more scratch resistant, it certainly isn't cheaper. If they didn't care about scratch resistance then they wouldn't have gone sapphire. Seems I got the point exactly...
 
I like how he started throwing a tantrum after he broke his watch. Wow.
 
I'm happy I returned my $700 notification device. I'm not that fat and lazy I can't pull my phone out of my pocket. Plus under just normal watch use you still need to charge it ever 1.5 days.
 
gawkgawk said:
I'm happy I returned my $700 notification device. I'm not that fat and lazy I can't pull my phone out of my pocket. Plus under just normal watch use you still need to charge it ever 1.5 days.
Click to expand...

There's an irony to saying that it's for "fat and lazy" people when fitness is one of its strong points. I've probably run more in the last two months than I did in the past year, because it's offering clear incentives to push myself a bit harder.

Besides, notifications mean a lot more for some of us. I get dozens of work-related emails per day -- I don't want to pull out my phone every time to see if it's something that needs my immediate attention.

Is it worth $700? Not necessarily, but you could argue that a $700 conventional watch is decidedly less useful. And that's what the Sport model is for. You get the core functionality of the $700 model in something that costs half as much.
 
Aurelius said:
There's an irony to saying that it's for "fat and lazy" people when fitness is one of its strong points. I've probably run more in the last two months than I did in the past year, because it's offering clear incentives to push myself a bit harder.

Besides, notifications mean a lot more for some of us. I get dozens of work-related emails per day -- I don't want to pull out my phone every time to see if it's something that needs my immediate attention.

Is it worth $700? Not necessarily, but you could argue that a $700 conventional watch is decidedly less useful. And that's what the Sport model is for. You get the core functionality of the $700 model in something that costs half as much.
Click to expand...


Or a 7000 dollar watch, of course you don't have to upgrade it every year.
 
Verge said:
Or a 7000 dollar watch, of course you don't have to upgrade it every year.
Click to expand...

You'd still come out ahead over a 10 year period of time. Considering that you could sell the old watch and upgrade. Even if you only got 50% of your money back on selling your old iWatch, you'd be able to keep buying new watches for a minimum of 15 years.

15 years of tech is insane. Who knows what tech on a watch will look like in 15 years. Heck, 15 years in the past was 2000... home of the 1GHz computer, no iPhones or Android. If you only purchased an iWatch every 2 years, the time would extend out even longer.
 
UnknownSouljer said:
You'd still come out ahead over a 10 year period of time. Considering that you could sell the old watch and upgrade. Even if you only got 50% of your money back on selling your old iWatch, you'd be able to keep buying new watches for a minimum of 15 years.

15 years of tech is insane. Who knows what tech on a watch will look like in 15 years. Heck, 15 years in the past was 2000... home of the 1GHz computer, no iPhones or Android. If you only purchased an iWatch every 2 years, the time would extend out even longer.
Click to expand...

True, but many scoff at the notion of dropping 7000 on a watch.

You could invest that 7 in the market and assuming historic gains and only getting alerts on your phone, you would have $29,240. So your opportunity cost is quite steep as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top