TR Forums

Don't hear this phone discussed much, everyone recommends the S7 or S7 edge instead and ignores it completely such as with the most recent TR recommendations article. I saw this drop test video though and the ending sure got my attention: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Gdx37VDbmA

It is sufficiently indestructible enough to not need a case, has the largest battery around, is IP68 water & dustproof rated, and has a microSD slot. Are there any phones even close to this beyond the S6 Active? The Moto Z Force has the same shatter resistant Gorilla Glass but I don't think it includes the polycarb layer and the battery is smaller. It also doesn't have the same bumper edging on the corners to protect the screen from corner drops.

Biggest downside is it's an AT&T exclusive so it isn't getting the same discounts the other S7s already are seeing. Best I can find is a $150 cashback offer if buying it on a 2-year contract.

To bad the screen is made of plastic, so any sharp metal objects will scratch the screen. See the video for a demonstration of it's durability.
JerryRigEverything - Galaxy S7 Active Scratch test, Bend test, Burn test - Durability video

Edit: For me I'd be less concerned with dropping the phone over what will likely happen to screen if say any sand/grit gets rubbed around with a finger on the screen.

Wasn't trying to steer you away from getting the phone earlier Kougar.

Saw something earlier from Consumer Reports saying the S7 Active they tested failed the water resistant test. I don't see anyone swimming with their phones but then a lot of people do stuff I wouldn't.

http://www.consumerreports.org/smartphones/samsung-galaxy-s7-active-fails-consumer-reports-water-resistance-test/

biffzinker wrote:

Wasn't trying to steer you away from getting the phone earlier Kougar.

No worries, any discussion of the phone itself or similar phones is most welcome. I knew the polycarb made it easier to scratch, but I didn't think it would scratch from just a car key.

ThatStupidCat wrote:

Saw something earlier from Consumer Reports saying the S7 Active they tested failed the water resistant test. I don't see anyone swimming with their phones but then a lot of people do stuff I wouldn't.

http://www.consumerreports.org/smartphones/samsung-galaxy-s7-active-fails-consumer-reports-water-resistance-test/

That is surprising, how does the active fail twice but the regular S7 and S7 edge both pass. Gonna have to follow that, I'm sure a bunch of people are water testing models now

What sort of hazards are you most concerned about? Are you trying to avoid the use of a case?

I've been watching the "ruggedized" phone market for some time (for a possible fleet-wide phone upgrade at work), and the options available continue to be piss-poor. Ancient, outdated hardware which is barely an improvement over our current 3+ year old Rugby Pro's (SGH-I547) stuck on Jelly Bean. The Sx Actives are really the only models with updated internal hardware, but I question how well their larger screens would hold up to abuse. The main hazard for our phones is high-impact (dropped from height, tools being dropped on them), and the most common damage is a cracked screen, even on 3.5" models. Roughly 4 of our office personnel were upgraded to S6 Active's a while back, but they're not really being tested in that environment.

When and if I'm ever given the green light, I think I'm going to recommend iPhone SE's with the heaviest Otterbox cases available. That decision comes from equal parts frustration, smaller screen, and (surprisingly) lower price.

The Egg wrote:

When and if I'm ever given the green light, I think I'm going to recommend iPhone SE's with the heaviest Otterbox cases available. That decision comes from equal parts frustration, smaller screen, and (surprisingly) lower price.

I'm assuming that would involve a nice, tough screen protector - but how usable is the phone through all that?

localhostrulez wrote:

The Egg wrote:

When and if I'm ever given the green light, I think I'm going to recommend iPhone SE's with the heaviest Otterbox cases available. That decision comes from equal parts frustration, smaller screen, and (surprisingly) lower price.

I'm assuming that would involve a nice, tough screen protector - but how usable is the phone through all that?

Right now we have their old Rugby Pros (already a ruggedized phone) in Otterbox Defender cases, which are the heaviest they offer I believe. It's a plastic clamshell with a built-in plastic screen cover, which is then placed inside a thick rubber boot. Despite this, we've still had somewhere in the neighborhood of 6-8 cracked screens (usually by being dropped off a ladder). The plastic screen covers do seem to accumulate a fair amount of dirt/grit underneath them, but it's hard to say how much this affects the performance of an already horrific Jelly Bean experience. I think many of are just using their personal phones when they need to look at a manual for detailed schematics and such (which doesn't happen often).

For most people an otterbox case is sufficient, however for certain jobs your better off buying an actual rugged device for ~$1500 USA e.g. http://business.panasonic.com/toughpad/ ... fz-n1.html

I have 6 Panasonic FZ-E1 sitting in the office as development devices. Although E1 and F1 devices run Windows Mobile not Android like the X1 and N1.

biffzinker wrote:

To bad the screen is made of plastic, so any sharp metal objects will scratch the screen.

This can be solved with your choice of a $10 screen protector....Plus, it's probably plastic so it doesn't crack/shatter when you drop it on something.

I personally HATE otterboxes. Most/all of the models are incredibly bulky. I prefer instead the thinner TPU cases. I've found they provide sufficient protection from scratches/drops, are not sticky like the silicone ones, and don't increase the thickness of the phone too much. However, I'd prefer a phone that just has this level of protection built in (a la Galaxy Active). Sure, for construction workers and the like, the Galaxy Active-type protection may not be sufficient, but I think it'd suit the other 95% of uses. The reason phone manufacturers don't like making rugged phones is because they're less likely to get re-purchases for broken/damaged phones = less profit. Same reason many items these days aren't made as study as they used to be.

To me, a phone that's waterproof at the very least, and even slightly ruggedized is ideal. No case needed, no worry of getting it wet.

DPete27 wrote:

biffzinker wrote:

To bad the screen is made of plastic, so any sharp metal objects will scratch the screen.

This can be solved with your choice of a $10 screen protector....Plus, it's probably plastic so it doesn't crack/shatter when you drop it on something.

I thought the point of the phone was it's ready to go new out of the box without having to add anything to protect the phone. In other words all the protection the phone needs is built in.

DPete27 wrote:

biffzinker wrote:

To bad the screen is made of plastic, so any sharp metal objects will scratch the screen.

This can be solved with your choice of a $10 screen protector....Plus, it's probably plastic so it doesn't crack/shatter when you drop it on something.

I personally HATE otterboxes. Most/all of the models are incredibly bulky. I prefer instead the thinner TPU cases. I've found they provide sufficient protection from scratches/drops, are not sticky like the silicone ones, and don't increase the thickness of the phone too much. However, I'd prefer a phone that just has this level of protection built in (a la Galaxy Active). Sure, for construction workers and the like, the Galaxy Active-type protection may not be sufficient, but I think it'd suit the other 95% of uses. The reason phone manufacturers don't like making rugged phones is because they're less likely to get re-purchases for broken/damaged phones = less profit. Same reason many items these days aren't made as study as they used to be.

To me, a phone that's waterproof at the very least, and even slightly ruggedized is ideal. No case needed, no worry of getting it wet.

Of course, I see people with Otterboxes tossing their phones around/dropping them for fun just to show off the case. Don't see people with TPU cases doing that. (I use TPU btw.)

As for stuff not being sturdy... yeah, I hate that expensive stuff, while feeling "premium", often isn't more durable (and sometimes no longer lasting) than cheap stuff. (Business laptops... OK, those often are an exception. And I do pay extra for those.) Just yesterday, I was dealing with a ~9 year old AV receiver, $3000 while new. Really nice, high quality sound (only does 1080i over HDMI, but analog audio doesn't go out of date), and it's kinda broken (despite being treated fine/used normally). Sorry Arcam, but for something that expensive, I expect better. Same reason you'll never see me driving a landrover ( ) - if I pay more, I expect better reliability (something I rarely see addressed in consumer circles). And you get the polar opposite in that case.

The Egg wrote:

What sort of hazards are you most concerned about? Are you trying to avoid the use of a case?

Mostly, yeah. I don't understand why form-factor or how pretty a smartphone looks is supposed to matter when it is all-but-required to be put in an ugly or bulky case for its own protection. Making the front AND back of phones out of glass just seems so pointlessly stupid that I won't even go there, there's not even a display on the back to give it a functional purpose.

The S7 proves a very simply, basic design change can make the phone drop safe (if you didn't see that drop test vid I linked earlier where it survived 51 faceplant drops at five feet), the only way to break it from dropping is if the screen faceplants on a rock or angled surface. The sides of the phone are a thick rubber, if anything has a prayer of surviving a drop from a ladder then it would be that phone (though it would still need a case to do it).


The S7 uses a plastic digitizer, I've read that glass digitizers have trouble with plastic protectors and such. Not sure if that's applicable in that usage scenario but it was another perk. Even if the glass under the polycarb did break the plastic digitizer will continue to function. I don't care for film screen protectors anyway given they scratch up and get nasty just from rubbing against things, a polycarb layer is at least tougher than those.

The downside to the S7 is Motorolla makes swappable polycarb layers for its Moto Z Force, but Samsung does not for the S7 Active. A real shame, as then it effectively would be a built-in screen protector that could just be swapped out if something put a big scratch in it.

The Egg wrote:

When and if I'm ever given the green light, I think I'm going to recommend iPhone SE's with the heaviest Otterbox cases available. That decision comes from equal parts frustration, smaller screen, and (surprisingly) lower price.

Those were very tiny phones compared to every other model on the display. Probably leaves room for a ton of case padding.

There's always this thing, exposéd 5 months ago on TR... Screen's not too big and looks pretty durable. Smaller screen, a bit larger than the iPhone SE and not too far off PPI-wise. Sure, the hardware is a bit dated (Snapdragon instead of Kryo) but not that long in the tooth.

I remember that news post, was a very interesting phone. Even had a giant battery. Even if it bumps the price up they should at least make a current-spec model as I bet it would do well.

Kougar wrote:

I remember that news post, was a very interesting phone. Even had a giant battery. Even if it bumps the price up they should at least make a current-spec model as I bet it would do well.

That CAT S60 phone is just now arriving to reviewers and available for pre-order. They're never going to make one with top end specs.

slowriot wrote:

Kougar wrote:

I remember that news post, was a very interesting phone. Even had a giant battery. Even if it bumps the price up they should at least make a current-spec model as I bet it would do well.

That CAT S60 phone is just now arriving to reviewers and available for pre-order. They're never going to make one with top end specs.

But why not? They already designed the phone, why not just sell two models of it. The high-spec model can become the budget model in a year or two, rinse and repeat.

Note 7 is coming so there is no much buzz about this phone because it is not available for most of the people unless AT&T users.

Gorillamp wrote:

Note 7 is coming so there is no much buzz about this phone because it is not available for most of the people unless AT&T users.

I'd be careful about getting one. It seems that expectations of "exploding sales" were not quite what we thought...

http://www.ibtimes.com/did-samsung-gala ... ts-2409821
Did Samsung Galaxy Note 7 Exploding Batteries Lead South Korea Giant To Halt Shipments?

Kougar wrote:

But why not? They already designed the phone, why not just sell two models of it. The high-spec model can become the budget model in a year or two, rinse and repeat.

Because it's a niche product with extremely niche features (e.g. low-res screen with resistive touch), designed to be highly durable for field applications, and sold under the name of a company that specializes in machinery and tools for the construction industry.  It has no need of high-spec hardware or a rapid product refresh cycle to do its job.

Seven is not Samsung's lucky no.
http://bgr.com/2016/09/26/galaxy-s7-edge-explosion/

Beware if you fly as a Samsung jihadist, there's a galaxy's worth of bans awaiting you.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37618618

trackerben wrote:

Seven is not Samsung's lucky no.
http://bgr.com/2016/09/26/galaxy-s7-edge-explosion/

Some people like living on the edge   I'm not one of them, not a fan of pointless glass on the back of already fragile phones. Going to see what pops up for Black Friday

Kougar wrote:

Some people like living on the edge   I'm not one of them, not a fan of pointless glass on the back of already fragile phones. Going to see what pops up for Black Friday

What phone are you thinking of, if the price is right?

If it is me then I will be looking forward to Google Pixel

There doesn't seem to be another reliable brand with extended OS updates, so it's the safe but expensive choice.