Don’t remove the Samsung Galaxy Phone “screen protector”—Four reports report dead phones after removing

[bradwiggo]

On 4/17/2019 at 9:56 PM, 79wjd said:

Of course it will. When folded it's only thicker than a normal phone -- it's otherwise similarly sized. And it's only about twice as thick as a normal phone. It will very easily fit in virtually all pockets. Comparatively, a 7" tablet that is 160x120x7 will absolutely not (and if it does, then it will be impossibly uncomfortable, extremely difficult to remove/insert into a pocket, and likely to break as you move).

 

There are a lot of times when I could use a bigger screen -- and clearly I'm not alone in that camp given that phones have steadily been growing in size. If size didn't matter, then all phones would still be <3".

 

Again, I don't want to have to carry a backpack. So, if I want a bigger screen, then my options are to either by a foldable phone (only inconvenient in cost, ignoring first gen teething problems, which will eventually go away if the concept catches on), or be unable to take advantage of the benefits of a bigger screen. 

 

Just because something doesn't make sense to YOU, doesn't mean that it doesn't make sense for others. Just like plenty of other people would look at you like you're crazy for wasting money on a 2070 when a used 750Ti would work perfectly fine.

Surely a screen protector won't break the phone -- it's almost certainly that it can't be removed without potentially damaging the screen protector they put in place, and thus they warn you not to put one on.

I don't know how bug your pockets are but I can't fit a phone bigger than an iPhone 8 in my pocket without it feeling like it's gonna snap when I sit down. 

 

I don't see the point of tablets if they don't have a proper desktop OS, surely then it's just a bigger phone? What could you possibly do on a phone that needs that much screen that you can't just wait till you get home to do? 

 

The GPU argument isn't valid for me, as I need a 2070 for VR, so a 750Ti wouldn't work for that. This phone won't enable you to do anything you couldn't already do, it will just make some things easier (although again I can't actually think of anything it would make easier), it would just be an arse to use for normal phone things as far as I can tell. 

 

I wish phones were still smaller personally, I have an SE and anything bigger just feels too big considering I only use phones for music and youtube.  

 

Also what's the point of putting a screen protector on if you can't take it off again. the point of a screen protector is to take the minor scratches that a screen gets in normally use, so that when you want, you can change the screen protector. 

[TechyBen]

13 hours ago, Thaldor said:

2000 folds with robot, not even with the magnet snapping... Not going to last normal use without silk gloves. That is one hell of a fail-phone. Biggest flaw clearly is that protective layer which is part of the screen but doesn't cover whole screen so it looks really much like a normal pre-attached film protector. Like did they save 5 cents (probably a lot less) in materials when not having the top layer of the screen covering the whole screen? Or is it just designed to fail within couple of months if you don't carry it around on velvet pillow and handle it with silk gloves (which both are sold separately by App... Samsung)?

 

If other foldable phones have these same issues and no one has yet overcome them, I predict foldable phones will have a lot harder and longer way to become common things than VR headsets when Oculus released DK1 with all of it's faults and problems.

PS, it's 200,000 folds. Your near an order of magnitude off.

 

However, I doubt the folding robot folded it at multiple angles/pressure points. As a human hand won't move exactly the same way in every standing/seating position.

[bradwiggo]

13 hours ago, Thaldor said:

2000 folds with robot, not even with the magnet snapping... Not going to last normal use without silk gloves. That is one hell of a fail-phone. Biggest flaw clearly is that protective layer which is part of the screen but doesn't cover whole screen so it looks really much like a normal pre-attached film protector. Like did they save 5 cents (probably a lot less) in materials when not having the top layer of the screen covering the whole screen? Or is it just designed to fail within couple of months if you don't carry it around on velvet pillow and handle it with silk gloves (which both are sold separately by App... Samsung)?

 

If other foldable phones have these same issues and no one has yet overcome them, I predict foldable phones will have a lot harder and longer way to become common things than VR headsets when Oculus released DK1 with all of it's faults and problems.

VR headsets were actually a completely different and new thing though, this seems like a gimmick. 

[Quadriplegic]

25 minutes ago, bradwiggo said:

VR headsets were actually a completely different and new thing though, this seems like a gimmick. 

Well, VR headsets were a gimmick too

[79wjd]

31 minutes ago, bradwiggo said:

I don't know how bug your pockets are but I can't fit a phone bigger than an iPhone 8 in my pocket without it feeling like it's gonna snap when I sit down. 

 

I don't see the point of tablets if they don't have a proper desktop OS, surely then it's just a bigger phone? What could you possibly do on a phone that needs that much screen that you can't just wait till you get home to do? 

 

The GPU argument isn't valid for me, as I need a 2070 for VR, so a 750Ti wouldn't work for that. This phone won't enable you to do anything you couldn't already do, it will just make some things easier (although again I can't actually think of anything it would make easier), it would just be an arse to use for normal phone things as far as I can tell. 

 

I wish phones were still smaller personally, I have an SE and anything bigger just feels too big considering I only use phones for music and youtube.  

Most people's pockets are big enough to fit the plus sized phones decently -- certainly not all, and that's why not everyone wants a plus sized phone. Not everyone's hands are big enough either. That's why multiple sizes exist. To pretend like there is no benefit for a bigger phone is absolutely idiotic.

 

I could certainly benefit from having room to spread 2-3 apps out on the screen, I could certainly benefit from both a wider and taller page view. I could certainly benefit from having more space to use a stylus (the fact that the fold doesn't come with the S-pen seems like such a horrible decision on Samsung's part imo, as it would be a perfect use case). A bigger screen for viewing pictures, watching movies, playing games, etc.... There are tons of use cases for bigger phones and more screen (hence why phones have been getting bigger, whether you like it or not).

 

The GPU argument is completely valid. You can use a 750Ti for VR, you will just have to run at lower settings and at a lower framerate. But it will still work -- a 2070 can't do anything a 750Ti can't do either. The difference is, that VR is something that YOU care about. That doesn't change the fact that there are things that OTHER people care about

31 minutes ago, bradwiggo said:

Also what's the point of putting a screen protector on if you can't take it off again. the point of a screen protector is to take the minor scratches that a screen gets in normally use, so that when you want, you can change the screen protector. 

Yes, not being able to remove the screen protector is less than ideal, but that's still very different from Samsung blocking it's use -- which they don't. It's just that designing a flexible screen without a protective layer was obviously not worth the costs.

Just now, Quadriplegic said:

Well, VR headsets were a gimmick too

No, VR was different because it was relevant to HIM. So of course it wasn't a gimmick.

[TechyBen]

 

 

A fair video. I kinda have to agree with *how* Samsung have done the plastic layer on the top. IMO it needed to be under the plastic trim/bezel, and is way to inside the edge of the screen.

 

That and the small middle fold hinge offers no protection of the screen. Like, not even a bit of plastic above/below to cover it from getting knocked and torn. I know it could not connect unless flexible, but rubber exists, and it don't even need to touch. Just have a shield to the screen fold at the bottom (very prominent in pictures and even the thumbnail above).

[Sauron]

On 4/17/2019 at 8:49 PM, bradwiggo said:

As someone who doesn't closely follow the phone market (mainly due to lack of interest/money), could someone explain the point of a folding phone? As it seems completely pointless to me. 

There isn't one, it's just more pointless fluff to justify making more expensive phones every year. It's marginally more convenient if you take notes on your phone a lot, but nothing that justifies the ridiculous price tag.

[79wjd]

11 minutes ago, Sauron said:

There isn't one, it's just more pointless fluff to justify making more expensive phones every year. It's marginally more convenient if you take notes on your phone a lot, but nothing that justifies the ridiculous price tag.

Well, the price would certainly drop as (if) it catches on. But, the price isn't worthwhile to YOU. Depending on where you live, $2000 might not sound like so much. In NYC, a decent and small one bedroom apartment in a decent area will easily cost more than that. A nice one bedroom in a decent area will cost around $3k+/month. So, $2000 every few years is literally irrelevant in comparison (and that's ignoring that the cost of the alternative phone and potential tablet you would buy instead).

[Sauron]

4 minutes ago, 79wjd said:

Well, the price would certainly drop as (if) it catches on. But, the price isn't worthwhile to YOU. Depending on where you live, $2000 might not sound like so much. In NYC, a decent and small one bedroom apartment in a decent area will easily cost more than that. A nice one bedroom in a decent area will cost around $3k+/month. So, $2000 every few years is literally irrelevant in comparison (and that's ignoring that the cost of the alternative phone and potential tablet you would buy instead).

For me it's less a matter of what I can afford and more a matter of not wasting money. Regardless of where you live (in the US or Europe at least), you can get a perfectly fine phone or tablet for 300$ or less; so how is spending 2000$ on something like this not burning your money? There may be a few niche situations where it's legitimately useful and maybe even worth the asking price, but for a normal person looking for a phone it just isn't.

 

 

Yes, this potentially paves the way for cheaper phones with this feature, but I'm not convinced it's a very useful thing to add in the first place... it doesn't really replace a tablet because when you watch a video or movie the image would be about the same size as on any other phone and I can't really think of too many other uses for a large screen device.

[bradwiggo]

55 minutes ago, 79wjd said:

Most people's pockets are big enough to fit the plus sized phones decently -- certainly not all, and that's why not everyone wants a plus sized phone. Not everyone's hands are big enough either. That's why multiple sizes exist. To pretend like there is no benefit for a bigger phone is absolutely idiotic.

 

I could certainly benefit from having room to spread 2-3 apps out on the screen, I could certainly benefit from both a wider and taller page view. I could certainly benefit from having more space to use a stylus (the fact that the fold doesn't come with the S-pen seems like such a horrible decision on Samsung's part imo, as it would be a perfect use case). A bigger screen for viewing pictures, watching movies, playing games, etc.... There are tons of use cases for bigger phones and more screen (hence why phones have been getting bigger, whether you like it or not).

 

The GPU argument is completely valid. You can use a 750Ti for VR, you will just have to run at lower settings and at a lower framerate. But it will still work -- a 2070 can't do anything a 750Ti can't do either. The difference is, that VR is something that YOU care about. That doesn't change the fact that there are things that OTHER people care about

Yes, not being able to remove the screen protector is less than ideal, but that's still very different from Samsung blocking it's use -- which they don't. It's just that designing a flexible screen without a protective layer was obviously not worth the costs.

No, VR was different because it was relevant to HIM. So of course it wasn't a gimmick.

This new phone is like the difference between a monitor and three monitors. The difference between a monitor and a VR headset is like the difference between a Motorola flip phone and an Xs max. Completely different. VR isn't a gimmick because it is a new thing entirely, this is just an expansion to the concept of a phone. The 750Ti can't be used for VR, as an inconsistent framerate will make you incredibly motion sick, and I doubt it would even launch a lot of the games. Maybe beat saber at lowest settings on a DK1 at 40fps, but that is like saying a 2011 dell laptop can run GTa V, technically yes, in reality, no. 

 

I never said that their aren't uses for bigger phone, I simply said I hate them and wish they would make them smaller, but I never said there are no advantages to them, just that they're are no advantages to me. 

 

Is a bigger screen so you can occasionally show people photos and play some mobile games on the go really worth twice the price of a flagship phone, and four times the price of a normal smart phone which is perfectly good enough? To me it isn't, and I highly highly doubt it will be to many people. Especially when it is badly made as these seem to be. 

[bradwiggo]

1 hour ago, Quadriplegic said:

Well, VR headsets were a gimmick too

They aren't, at least not in the way this phone is. They are an entirely different thing to anything wee have seen before. Three monitors to one monitor is what the Samsung flip is to regular phones. Or one of those 32:9 monitors. VR isn't an add-on or an upgrade to something, it is completely different. 

[79wjd]

3 minutes ago, bradwiggo said:

They aren't, at least not in the way this phone is. They are an entirely different thing to anything wee have seen before. Three monitors to one monitor is what the Samsung flip is to regular phones. Or one of those 32:9 monitors. VR isn't an add-on or an upgrade to something, it is completely different. 

Oh? Do you not view content on a screen-like interface, that just happens to be positioned a bit differently?

 

VR isn't an entirely new thing either. It's also just an extension of a monitor. 

[bradwiggo]

1 minute ago, 79wjd said:

Oh? Do you not view content on a screen-like interface, that just happens to be positioned a bit differently?

 

VR isn't an entirely new thing either. It's also just an extension of a monitor. 

Most electronic devices have screens, does that mean they are all just the same thing? You aren't really viewing content in VR, you are IN the content, it's not the same as a monitor because you are essentially in the monitor. I don't really see your point anyway, my original point was that this huge foldable phone doesn't enable you to do anything you couldn't already do, it just maybe allows you to do it a little bit better. VR allows for completely experiences. A lot of VR games are simply not possible on a regular monitor, as they rely on you actually being there (or at least making it look like you are). 

[bradwiggo]

55 minutes ago, 79wjd said:

Well, the price would certainly drop as (if) it catches on. But, the price isn't worthwhile to YOU. Depending on where you live, $2000 might not sound like so much. In NYC, a decent and small one bedroom apartment in a decent area will easily cost more than that. A nice one bedroom in a decent area will cost around $3k+/month. So, $2000 every few years is literally irrelevant in comparison (and that's ignoring that the cost of the alternative phone and potential tablet you would buy instead).

Saying a phone is cheap because it costs nothing compared to a house is like saying a Yacht is cheap compared to an aircraft carrier. I don't want to spend any where near as much on a phone as I do on a house. You can get an excellent phone for £500 and an excellent tablet for £700-800. Then spend the left over £800 on a computer, or a laptop, or a second hand car. Also I think you are overestimating the average amount of money people have, very few people can afford $3k a month, most people earn under that. 

[79wjd]

8 minutes ago, bradwiggo said:

Saying a phone is cheap because it costs nothing compared to a house is like saying a Yacht is cheap compared to an aircraft carrier. I don't want to spend any where near as much on a phone as I do on a house. You can get an excellent phone for £500 and an excellent tablet for £700-800. Then spend the left over £800 on a computer, or a laptop, or a second hand car. Also I think you are overestimating the average amount of money people have, very few people can afford $3k a month, most people earn under that. 

The median household income in the US is over 50k -- certainly more than $3k/month. Not that you can afford to spend that much on an apartment at that level of income, but that's not the point (and isn't at all what I said). $2k amortized over three years is literally the cost of a going out to dinner once a month. It's an absolutely irelevant amount of money compared to what people will spend on literally everything else in their life. And if you're that budget constrained, then you're probably not looking at a flagship phone or multiple devices either. You should be buying a $150 phone and keeping it for years.

[TacoSenpai]

I stopped using screen protectors.  Most are a hassle to apply and air bubbles get annoying.  Plus fingerprints get harder to wipe off.

[bradwiggo]

7 minutes ago, 79wjd said:

The median household income in the US is over 50k -- certainly more than $3k/month. Not that you can afford to spend that much on an apartment at that level of income, but that's not the point (and isn't at all what I said). $2k amortized over three years is literally the cost of a going out to dinner once a month. It's an absolutely irelevant amount of money compared to what people will spend on literally everything else in their life. And if you're that budget constrained, then you're probably not looking at a flagship phone or multiple devices either. You should be buying a $150 phone and keeping it for years.

Having a lot of money doesn't mean the concept of value isn't important anymore, its still twice as expensive as top of the line phones and doesn't really justify that increase in price. Also normal phones are getting more expensive, so I can't see the price of these foldable ones coming down any time soon. Phones are largely a fashion accessory now anyways. I mean if you have the money and want to buy one, fair enough, I'm not trying to stop you, I just think these phones are less than useless, and that, as you said, a £150 phone is all you need, it does all of the same stuff a £1000 does, it just doesn't do it quite as quickly (but not to the point where it matters). My SE does absolutely everything I need it to, it's fast, responsive, fits in my pocket and the battery life is enough to get me through a day if I don't use it too much (and I have about 10 power banks to use if it does run out). I think Apple are selling them again for about £150, maybe a bit more (new, not refurbished). I don't really see why a £1000 phone is 6 times better than an SE, so I'm never going to think a £2000 is 12 times better. 

 

I wouldn't mind having a slightly better camera, or a slightly better battery life, or a slightly more convenient way of unlocking my phone, but I don't thin it's worth the money, same with this. 

[79wjd]

5 minutes ago, bradwiggo said:

Having a lot of money doesn't mean the concept of value isn't important anymore, its still twice as expensive as top of the line phones and doesn't really justify that increase in price. Also normal phones are getting more expensive, so I can't see the price of these foldable ones coming down any time soon. Phones are largely a fashion accessory now anyways. I mean if you have the money and want to buy one, fair enough, I'm not trying to stop you, I just think these phones are less than useless, and that, as you said, a £150 phone is all you need, it does all of the same stuff a £1000 does, it just doesn't do it quite as quickly (but not to the point where it matters). My SE does absolutely everything I need it to, it's fast, responsive, fits in my pocket and the battery life is enough to get me through a day if I don't use it too much (and I have about 10 power banks to use if it does run out). I think Apple are selling them again for about £150, maybe a bit more (new, not refurbished). I don't really see why a £1000 phone is 6 times better than an SE, so I'm never going to think a £2000 is 12 times better. 

 

I wouldn't mind having a slightly better camera, or a slightly better battery life, or a slightly more convenient way of unlocking my phone, but I don't thin it's worth the money, same with this. 

It can not make sense to YOU. That's not a problem. But you were claiming that, because it doesn't make sense to YOU, it doesn't make sense at all, for anyone. Full stop. That's the problem here. Other people have other priorities than you.

[Bcat00]

9 hours ago, bradwiggo said:

I fail to see the point of a tablet unless it has a desktop OS, and this doesn't. If you have a need for a tablet with a mobile OS, which is basically just a big phone, then sure I guess. 

I get it, I felt the same way until a couple of months ago where i began to make long trips for business. 

 

Carrying around 2 items vs 1 is very much worth the extra dough in my opinion when your work could easily net you that money back. 

[bradwiggo]

7 hours ago, 79wjd said:

It can not make sense to YOU. That's not a problem. But you were claiming that, because it doesn't make sense to YOU, it doesn't make sense at all, for anyone. Full stop. That's the problem here. Other people have other priorities than you.

I never claimed that someone might not get a use out of it, I just don't see the mass market appeal of it, and I don't see any reason why anyone could use one. People may have a reason to use them, fair enough, they can buy one, but I don't see what those reasons would be. I'm not trying to claim people aren't allowed to buy them, I just don't see the point, not only for me, but I don't see the point for anyone, maybe I am missing a market, fair enough, but I personally don't see the point. 

[DeScruff]

On 4/17/2019 at 6:00 PM, LAwLz said:

Does anyone know how hard it was to peel the "screen protector" off?

If it required very little force, like the normal pre-applied film on devices then I can see this being really, really bad. However, if it requires force and actually trying to remove it then it's less of an issue (but still concerning and a design flaw).

 

 

That's what I'm wondering.

If it's somewhere in-between say... Regular film to... Removing shrinkwrap from Nintendo switch game cases without a knife. (Seriously it's more difficult then you'd expect and that's something your supposed to remove!) I really can't blame someone for mistaking it as packaging.

 

If anything it could be considered a design flaw that it even looks like an additional screen protector rather then a part of the phone.

[TechyBen]

23 hours ago, VegetableStu said:

those attempting a flexible phone should make it one contiguous piece externally. the hinges shouldn't expose the display layer at all. also agree on the protective layer, especially when it won't do the job over time (there's a reviewer who had her unit started peeling like a cheap sheet screen protector)

 

kinda counted on the samsung phone being the more durable one, since the display is inside the clamshell, but now I have super serious doubts on royole's and huawei's attempts (especially with the numerous number of hinges on huawei's, and that thing doesn't compensate for the bend length at all (since it's creasing upwards when "flat"))

 

it definitely has a place, but not when it's built like that (although I prefer samsung folded the other dimension. reminded me of nokia's lipstick phone ._.)

 

maybe related: compliant mechanisms

 

I actually 3D printed that "wrench". It lasted 10 mins then snapped in 2 places. Why? My materials are not really the right type. You can do some of these things (see biology ), but need the right materials and designs. Samsung seems close, but still not there yet.

[ewitte]

Apple fold:  "Your closing it wrong"

[suicidalfranco]

don't remove "screen protector"

and don't put clay on the hinge

 

 

[Misanthrope]

Maybe it's a load-bearing screen protector?:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRVExJZKIT8