3 ms·

> some degree of waterproofing/water resistance Can we have this discussion once? In this thread alone, there's like 50 instances of people making this claim a

by Aachen 6mo ago

> some degree of waterproofing/water resistance Can we have this discussion once? In this thread alone, there's like 50 instances of people making this claim and each time it takes about 20 minutes before at least one person replies that it's not the case, after which no refutals are posted. I'm happy to learn it is false if it is (I never had a phone that I trusted to be waterproof to any degree so I don't have first-hand knowledge), but it gets really tiring to read the same information level over and over as a reason for why we can't have nice things Taking this comment as an example of someone who actually used a battery-swappable phone in rain on a motorcycle: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47835184 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47835184 (I'm not only taking the person's word for it: the device is also IP certified as waterproof 30 mins at 1m depth)

dwaite 6mo ago
> (I'm not only taking the person's word for it: the device is also IP certified as waterproof 30 mins at 1m depth) Many expect phones these days to be the more stringent IP 68, this would correspond to a device with the lesser water resistance of IP X7. That phone only needs to be restored to IP X5 to handle usage in rain. So it is great they got it (somewhat? completely?) restored, but it was a device with less water resistance than many flagships phone today, tested with a lower level of water resistance than it was originally rated for.
- Aachen 6mo ago
  Fwiw, I also use devices with no IP certification or claims whatsoever in mild rain. It's not because there's a drop on the plastic case that it'll seize up, so the 5th ingress protection level being minimum for rain... I mean, technically yes, practically... depends if you really mean exposure to proper rain for more than the distance between bus stop and door step, say Edit: wait, > this would correspond to a device with the lesser water resistance of IP X7. If 7 is already considered lesser... > That phone only needs to be restored to IP X5 to handle usage in rain. I looked it up and level 3 is rain actually ("spraying water"). How is 7 not sufficient for anything but perhaps full-on diving sessions

by Aachen 6mo ago

dwaite 6mo ago

> (I'm not only taking the person's word for it: the device is also IP certified as waterproof 30 mins at 1m depth) Many expect phones these days to be the more stringent IP 68, this would correspond to a device with the lesser water resistance of IP X7. That phone only needs to be restored to IP X5 to handle usage in rain. So it is great they got it (somewhat? completely?) restored, but it was a device with less water resistance than many flagships phone today, tested with a lower level of water resistance than it was originally rated for.

Aachen 6mo ago
Fwiw, I also use devices with no IP certification or claims whatsoever in mild rain. It's not because there's a drop on the plastic case that it'll seize up, so the 5th ingress protection level being minimum for rain... I mean, technically yes, practically... depends if you really mean exposure to proper rain for more than the distance between bus stop and door step, say Edit: wait, > this would correspond to a device with the lesser water resistance of IP X7. If 7 is already considered lesser... > That phone only needs to be restored to IP X5 to handle usage in rain. I looked it up and level 3 is rain actually ("spraying water"). How is 7 not sufficient for anything but perhaps full-on diving sessions