Greener BeeGreen ElectronicsThis ‘waterproof’ phone isn’t actually waterproof
This 'waterproof' phone isn't actually waterproof
People are finding out the hard way (Picture: Getty/metro.co.uk)

We’ve all been there.

You’re showing off your new waterproof phone/phone case to your mates by chucking it in swimming pools and carelessly dunking it in hot tubs (or something like that).

FASLANE, SCOTLAND - SEPTEMBER 23:  A trident submarine makes it's way out from Faslane Naval base on September 23, 2009 in Faslane, Scotland. British prime minister Gordon Brown, will tell the UN the he will cut the trident missile carrying submarine from four to three.  (Photo by Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images)

Parliament to vote on Trident upgrade this month

Then you realise it’s not actually waterproof. Nightmare.

That’s what has happened to owners of the Samsung Galaxy S7 Active, which is advertised as being ‘water resistant’ but is actually not.

The phone, which is only available in the US and costs $795 (£615), failed tests carried out by Consumer Reports, a non-profit organization that conducts product testing.

FILE - In this Feb. 22, 2016, file photo, a waterproof Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge mobile phone is submersed in water during a preview of Samsung's flagship store, Samsung 837, in New York's Meatpacking District. Consumer Reports says Samsungs Galaxy S7 Active malfunctions in water despite being marketed as water resistant, though the regular S7 and S7 Edge models passed. Consumer Reports rates the S7 and S7 Edge phones as Excellent and the Active likely would have joined them. Instead, Consumer Reports isnt recommending the model because two phones failed after being submerged in water. (AP Photo/Richard Drew, File)
The model is a version of the Galaxy S7 Edge which actually is waterproof (Picture: AP)

Samsung claims the phone can survive in five feet of water for 30 minutes.

But Consumer Reports said after half an hour underwater, the screen flashed green and did not respond to touch.

Andrea Leadsom admits: I don't like gay marriage law because it hurts Christians

LeadsomJokes is now a Twitter account

Maria Rerecich, Consumer Reports’ director of electronics testing, said ‘we bought two and they both failed’, and added she was surprised as Samsung’s claims are usually ‘fairly good’.

Samsung said it has received very few complaints and had put the phone through strict testing, but ‘there may be an off-chance that a defective device is not as watertight as it should be’.

A Reddit post from an employee at US electronics store Best Buy appears to back up Consumer Reports’ claims.

I work at Best Buy, we have a Samsung rep who has a demo phone in water playing videos. A girl who works with us dipped hers in and it broke.

She reached out to Samsung but they said although it’s advertised as such there is no warranty in place against water damage.

Article source: http://metro.co.uk/2016/07/09/this-waterproof-phone-isnt-actually-waterproof-5996558/


Comments

This ‘waterproof’ phone isn’t actually waterproof — No Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *