Corning Responds To Worrying Galaxy Note 7 Scratch Test Video

[pxc]

The set of picks don't seem to be the problem, so the stratch-like appearance of the transfer is expected. What the statement above seems to have a larger problem with is the lack of distinction between transfer and scratches, but either way the screen is damaged by the appearance of what looks like scatches at a much lower level than expected of a glass material.

 

[Spewn]

The set of picks don't seem to be the problem, so the stratch-like appearance of the transfer is expected. What the statement above seems to have a larger problem with is the lack of distinction between transfer and scratches, but either way the screen is damaged by the appearance of what looks like scatches at a much lower level than expected of a glass material.

Right, and the problem with the test having been done in a completely uncontrolled manner is - how much pressure did it take to make that happen? You don't know, I don't know, the guy who performed the test doesn't know. Is that useful? How do you compare that to anything else?

 

[sleepeeg3]

I'm still using my old Note 2, with a much older version of Gorilla Glass. In the 4 years I've had it, I've managed to not scratch my screen even one single time.

Yes, you have. You just care about scratches less.

 

[pxc]

Right, and the problem with the test having been done in a completely uncontrolled manner is - how much pressure did it take to make that happen? You don't know, I don't know, the guy who performed the test doesn't know. Is that useful? How do you compare that to anything else?

For reproducibility, that could be a problem. As a scratch test, not so much.

You do realize that the guy doing the test wasn't out to get Corning, right? He regularly reviews phones and scratch tests all models in a similar way. His finding that GG5 is only a step above plastic for scratch damage has real-world consequences, particularly on an $850 phone.

 

[Deleted member 108676]

Everyone in here is being very reasonable about realizing why things could be the way they are (hardness vs. toughness, etc)

If this were on an iPhone...oh my fucking god the damn sky would be falling because "its such a piece of shit phone."

 

[Spewn]

For reproducibility, that could be a problem. As a scratch test, not so much.

And yet you reference other tests he's performed while admitting he *can't reproduce the test conditions*. So again, how is that useful? If you can't reproduce the conditions then you can't directly compare the results of the tests. I'm not saying he's out to get anyone, that's not the point. How much pressure did he use? Unless someone can answer that question with an actual number, you can't compare one test to another.

 

[pxc]

It is useful to demonstrate that something has changed in GG5, making it much easier to damage. It doesn't matter that it can't be reproduced exactly. That's not the problem. That's only used as a lame excuse to cover up a big flaw in a new product. I'm not sure why this isn't clear.

There's going to be two cases:
1) The guy who tested it is correct and GG5 is much easier to mark up/scratch than GG4.
2) The guy is incorrect and GG5 proves to be as scratch and damage resistant as GG4.

The evidence so far supports #1. Let me know when ANY independent testing shows evidence of #2.

 

[Deleted whining member 223597]

Is that how material transfer works too?

Lol, if it's that easy to transfer the metal from the pick to the screen then that's just embarrassing. He wasn't able to remove the "scratches", something that didn't happen on previous versions of GG. Based on everyone having such a hard time believing this, I bet he does it again in a more controlled manner. Either way, it looks like GG5 is shit for scratches, or w/e you want to call it.

FYI he wasn't able to clean it off.

 

[rat]

Pretty sure the majority of you never heard of "metallic transfer" until this response from Samsung. Face it, the screen is getting scratched and you would consider it so had they not come up with this flimsy excuse.

 

[nilepez]

View attachment 6926

Dunno man, each generation seems to have new dealbreakers that people tend to excuse as a minor issue. Low resolution, lack of enough ram to multitask, thinner and thinner to where they're structurally deficient, now talk of their removing the headphones jack...

I don't know how that happens. I sit on my phone (a 6s +) and it's never bent. Same with an older 6. That looks like someone tried to bend it, but maybe they're very heavy and they sat on the edge of something made of concrete or steel.

 

[nilepez]

Lol, if it's that easy to transfer the metal from the pick to the screen then that's just embarrassing. He wasn't able to remove the "scratches", something that didn't happen on previous versions of GG. Based on everyone having such a hard time believing this, I bet he does it again in a more controlled manner. Either way, it looks like GG5 is shit for scratches, or w/e you want to call it.

FYI he wasn't able to clean it off.

For the record, it looks like a scratch to me, but was cleaning cloth wet? If not, then it might not remove it. I get crap on my glasses all the time and a dry cloth doesn't get it clean, but a squirt of lens cleaner with the same cloth and it removes it all.

 

[B00nie]

No amount of FUD will make you right.

Humble Bundle is one of the biggest third party stores for Android games. FDroid is a open source market.

Lool you call that FUD? Haven't you noticed that Android is the unsafest mobile platform even if you stick to the official store? Sideloading is just as stupid as using windows and torrenting warez on it.

 

[rat]

Lool you call that FUD? Haven't you noticed that Android is the unsafest mobile platform even if you stick to the official store? Sideloading is just as stupid as using windows and torrenting warez on it.

Yeah, there was a reason I had you on ignore.

Android is safe as long as you don't download pirated apps. Humble Bundle and FDroid don't contain pirated apps.

Humble Bundle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The fact that you immediately compare sideloading on Android to downloading warez on Windows demonstrates your profound lack of knowledge of this topic, so... shoo, git, go away.

 

[B00nie]

Yeah, there was a reason I had you on ignore.

Android is safe as long as you don't download pirated apps. Humble Bundle and FDroid don't contain pirated apps.

Humble Bundle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The fact that you immediately compare sideloading on Android to downloading warez on Windows demonstrates your profound lack of knowledge of this topic, so... shoo, git, go away.

Stop spreading lies. Even the official Google play is littered with apps that contain various degrees of malware. It's a documented fact. “Godless” apps, some found in Google Play, can root 90% of Android phones

If you jailbreak your iOS and sideload apps you bypass the very thing that makes using iPhones safer than Android.

Anyway, enough off topic.

 

[M76]

If you jailbreak your iOS and sideload apps you bypass the very thing that makes using iPhones safer than Android.

"safe" is not a metric that most people buy phones by. It's usability and versatility.

 

[B00nie]

"safe" is not a metric that most people buy phones by. It's usability and versatility.

So in your (edit: most peoples) opinion mobile pay, mobile wallet, mobile internet banking verification, paid service numbers in Nigeria are all just stuff you can leave in the open. How dumb of me, how COULD safety be paramount in a smart phone.

 

[M76]

So in your (edit: most peoples) opinion mobile pay, mobile wallet, mobile internet banking verification, paid service numbers in Nigeria are all just stuff you can leave in the open. How dumb of me, how COULD safety be paramount in a smart phone.

I don't need my phone to protect me from my own stupidity.

 

[B00nie]

I don't need my phone to protect me from my own stupidity.

Lol obviously you do if you don't understand that if your phone gets rootkitted, the malware can phone silently to Nigerian paid numbers at 1000 bucks a minute. That is even if you never do any mobile pay business through your phone.

 

[M76]

Lol obviously you do if you don't understand that if your phone gets rootkitted, the malware can phone silently to Nigerian paid numbers at 1000 bucks a minute. That is even if you never do any mobile pay business through your phone.

An application that roots your phone and starts phoning nigeria all by itself is almost as common as ufo sightings. And how many of those sightings turn out to be actual aliens? The fact that I never even heard stories about this tells me how much credit to give to this, especially coming from an apple worshiper.

 

[Astral Abyss]

Since most people stick a screen protector on their GG screen (which negates the usefulness of GG) I'm guessing Corning was ok giving up a little scratch resistance to try and avoid cracked screens. They just don't want to admit they traded scratch resistance for shatter resistance.

 

[B00nie]

An application that roots your phone and starts phoning nigeria all by itself is almost as common as ufo sightings. And how many of those sightings turn out to be actual aliens? The fact that I never even heard stories about this tells me how much credit to give to this, especially coming from an apple worshiper.

That's hardly surprising given the obvious lack of information you've displayed so far. Something like this: Android malware makes calls even when the phone is switched OFF

 

[rat]

Since most people stick a screen protector on their GG screen (which negates the usefulness of GG) I'm guessing Corning was ok giving up a little scratch resistance to try and avoid cracked screens. They just don't want to admit they traded scratch resistance for shatter resistance.

Except due to Samsung using curved glass, there's virtually no tempered glass screen protector that will fit. It ends up being a tradeoff with no benefits.

 

[M76]

That's hardly surprising given the obvious lack of information you've displayed so far. Something like this: Android malware makes calls even when the phone is switched OFF

magnificent. Literally the first sentence of the article:

• The malware is installed when the user downloads infected Android apps

So does it install without user interaction an complicity? No. So you're deliberately misleading. Stop it. And go back to worshipping your mac and your iphone in solitude.

Spotting dubious apps on the play shop is about as hard as spotting a nigerian scam email. Guess if you're so stupid that you're fooled by those, then yes you're better off with an Iphone.

 

[lcpiper]

It's nearly impossible to make a single material that is both shatter and scratch resistant. (toughness vs hardness) You almost always have to trade one for the other.

I bought a Droid Turbo and within a week I dumped the case I bought for it cause they already offered me a one-time free replacement if I broke the display and the back was made from Kevlar so what the hell, I went bareback.

Over one year later and the phone is fine. I put a GG screen protector layer on it and it's been awesome.

The way I see it, you make the original display glass as shatter proof as possible and rely on replacable GG coatings designed for scratch resistance. They really only have to last so long before the phones are replaced anyway, and as long as the failure rate is low enough, the product is good enough.

 

[lcpiper]

Right, and the problem with the test having been done in a completely uncontrolled manner is - how much pressure did it take to make that happen? You don't know, I don't know, the guy who performed the test doesn't know. Is that useful? How do you compare that to anything else?

Spewn has an entirely valid point. Tests must be controlled by testing parameters or they are often useless demonstrations and not tests.

 

[lcpiper]

For reproducibility, that could be a problem. As a scratch test, not so much.

You do realize that the guy doing the test wasn't out to get Corning, right? He regularly reviews phones and scratch tests all models in a similar way. His finding that GG5 is only a step above plastic for scratch damage has real-world consequences, particularly on an $850 phone.

OK, so has this guy tested my Droid Turbo? That would be interesting as I have run it for over a year bare without a protective case, though I did add a GG screen protector which has been on the phone since I bought it. I would be interested to know how my phone handled his scratch test.

 

[lcpiper]

It is useful to demonstrate that something has changed in GG5, making it much easier to damage. It doesn't matter that it can't be reproduced exactly. That's not the problem. That's only used as a lame excuse to cover up a big flaw in a new product. I'm not sure why this isn't clear.

There's going to be two cases:
1) The guy who tested it is correct and GG5 is much easier to mark up/scratch than GG4.
2) The guy is incorrect and GG5 proves to be as scratch and damage resistant as GG4.

The evidence so far supports #1. Let me know when ANY independent testing shows evidence of #2.

Why is it not just as clear to you, that if the tester doesn't know how much pressure was used, then he doesn't know if it was an unreasonable amount of pressure?

I wonder, does Corning release their test findings on their products? Are there ratings like a Grade AA surface rating and what that means in real world applications? I would be asking these questions. Perhaps GG5 was neither developed nor advertised as being better than GG4, perhaps it's just different and perhaps it isn't the best choice for a phone. But I am doubting that Corning doesn't know full well it's properties and how it compares to it's other offerings.

 

[N4CR]

Funny how my iPhone 6 had none of those issues. I had a GS6 Edge. Not once did I notice the higher resolution, although the AMOLED screen is way better than any LCD. But you wouldn't know because you only use phones running one OS.

As someone who used ips and oled phones back to back im never getting another oled until they fix burn in. Colours are beautiful, awesome for reproducing monochrome sources accurately etc but burn in is a deal breaker. Happens on them all.
If they go amoled next revision, It'll be the next 'iphone bendgate' bs mark my words.

 

[B00nie]

magnificent. Literally the first sentence of the article:

• The malware is installed when the user downloads infected Android apps

So does it install without user interaction an complicity? No. So you're deliberately misleading. Stop it. And go back to worshipping your mac and your iphone in solitude.

Spotting dubious apps on the play shop is about as hard as spotting a nigerian scam email. Guess if you're so stupid that you're fooled by those, then yes you're better off with an Iphone.

Where are you getting these things? I said Google play is littered with malware, for example several pokemon go related ones are currently offered. You don't find malware in Apple app store. And if you sideload you have absolutely zero way to tell if the app is safe or not.

And it seems at least 10 million others have a pretty different opinion on spotting the malware lol: 10 million Android devices reportedly infected with Chinese malware