Lumia 930 water and dust resistent .Does it matter??

[Qais Abu-Hasan]

Hey all,
I love the Nokia lumia 930 but I think that this flagship needs something in order to compete with other flagships so it must pack some of the new features there. Water and dust Resistance is one of the most wanted and loved features , for me I was a bit disappointed that it doesn't has this thing , moreover a fingerprint scanner is missing - that's not a big deal for me, but it is for water and dust Resistance , which would be very beneficial.
How about you ?? Does it really matter to have a flagship that is NOT water and dust resistant or this might make you think again before buying the lumia 930?!

Posted via the WPC App for Android!

 

[SSgt Bruskowiz]

I believe it depents on the kind of work and or hobby's you do.
I worked a lot outside, in wind, snow and rain and sometimes i had to go in the water and dirt.
So yea i think it does matter.
If your always at home or in a nice clean office, shop, school or whatever i think it doesnt realy matters.
But you are a constructionworker or a firefighter or maybe even a soldier than i think it does.

 

[Moiz Mian]

They just recycled the Verizon Icon, I think either they got lazy, or they have something more exciting coming later, which is why ATT didn't announce that they would be getting the 930. Hopefully that will have some cooler new hardware. If this is all they got for the next 12 months, then shame on them.

 

[DJCBS]

Well it depends on what you consider "water resistant". And if you're not mixing it with waterproof.

For example, while the Galaxy S5 is IP67, the Xperia Z, Z1, Z1C and Z2 are IP58. Which means that while the S5 can be splattered and quickly washed, it can't be immersed during a long time nor bellow 1m. The Z2, on the other hand, albeit the apparent lower number, CAN be continuously immersed underwater, which makes it waterproof and not just water resistant.

As for me, neither are essential features of a phone. Nokia's build quality make up for the lack of IP certification. And yet the Lumias are water resistant to a certain point. If you quickly drop them under water, it will still work and if you drop your wine over it, it won't die.
I would rather see Sony to a certain degree and certainly Samsung adopting Nokia's build quality than to see Nokia worried about IP certifications.

 

[Moiz Mian]

Well it depends on what you consider "water resistant". And if you're not mixing it with waterproof.

For example, while the Galaxy S5 is IP67, the Xperia Z, Z1, Z1C and Z2 are IP58. Which means that while the S5 can be splattered and quickly washed, it can't be immersed during a long time nor bellow 1m. The Z2, on the other hand, albeit the apparent lower number, CAN be continuously immersed underwater, which makes it waterproof and not just water resistant.

As for me, neither are essential features of a phone. Nokia's build quality make up for the lack of IP certification. And yet the Lumias are water resistant to a certain point. If you quickly drop them under water, it will still work and if you drop your wine over it, it won't die.
I would rather see Sony to a certain degree and certainly Samsung adopting Nokia's build quality than to see Nokia worried about IP certifications.

I would argue Sony's build quality is a step above Nokia's these days. They're Xperia Z line is all glass and aluminum, 6mm thin, light, AND with bigger batteries. I think Nokia could learn a thing or two from Sony. These plastic Lumia's are getting way overdone. How about a colorful aluminum like the N8's?

 

[Zacharyw70]

They just recycled the Verizon Icon, I think either they got lazy, or they have something more exciting coming later, which is why ATT didn't announce that they would be getting the 930. Hopefully that will have some cooler new hardware. If this is all they got for the next 12 months, then shame on them.

I doubt AT&T is going to be getting any "Special" top secret phone, they'll likely get the Lumia 930 as well. Introducing the Lumia 930, and then later introducing a better phone would really be a middle finger to their consumer base.

 

[Zacharyw70]

I would argue Sony's build quality is a step above Nokia's these days. They're Xperia Z line is all glass and aluminum, 6mm thin, light, AND with bigger batteries. I think Nokia could learn a thing or two from Sony. These plastic Lumia's are getting way overdone. How about a colorful aluminum like the N8's?

Sony's phones are way too squared off, (Although it appears that is going to happen with the L930) and unless it's on the display I don't see why anyone would use glass on a phone given how easily breakable it can be.

 

[maverick786us]

Sony's phones are way too squared off, (Although it appears that is going to happen with the L930) and unless it's on the display I don't see why anyone would use glass on a phone given how easily breakable it can be.

How about Sapphire glass? Glass gives a premium look and feel

 

[Squachy]

water/dust resistance is just a gimmick that is being utilized now because every kind of priority requirement thing that can one up the competition has been reached (faster processors, better cameras, larger screens, voice assistants, etc) Now we get semi useless stuff like fingerprint scanners, waterproofing and dustproofing because there's nothing really anyone can do to 'outdo' the competition. Do they have their uses? sure, but they aren't deal breaker items. Maybe for bragging rights but that's about it.

 

[DJCBS]

I would argue Sony's build quality is a step above Nokia's these days. They're Xperia Z line is all glass and aluminum, 6mm thin, light, AND with bigger batteries. I think Nokia could learn a thing or two from Sony. These plastic Lumia's are getting way overdone. How about a colorful aluminum like the N8's?

Well, I never had any complains about Nokia hardware in 15 years. Though yeah, the Lumia build quality isn't what I was used to from Nokia, but still, no complains (apart from the darn dust in the ffc on the 920).
But I must say I was really impressed with Sony's build quality. And yeah, the fact that Sony's Z2 presents a similar phone to the 930 but with better specs all around in a similar format and for a cheaper price is one of the big reasons I was utterly disappointed the 930 improved nothing over the Icon.

 

[DJCBS]

Sony's phones are way too squared off, (Although it appears that is going to happen with the L930) and unless it's on the display I don't see why anyone would use glass on a phone given how easily breakable it can be.

Actually Sony uses Dragontrail Glass which is similar to Gorilla Glass but I think it's more resistant to scratches (which's why people complained so much about the anti-shatter film Sony placed upon the screens until the Z2). At any rate it's not "glass" as used on the old iPhone models.
I'm not MAD about the use of Dragon glass (yeah, I'm cutting the "trail" on purpose. I think some people will get the reference ;P) on the front AND back of the devices, but God does it provide a really classy, high end feeling to the phones.

I was also pretty concerned about the resistance but after seeing a Z1 go through hell and back, my fears were washed away. Still, I would rather Sony would use aluminium, magnesium or polycarbonate on the back of the phone...just in case.

 

[Ejay Lozano]

I don't care, I just want it to have at least 32GB of memory and most importantly built-in Qi wireless charging. AT&T don't screw this up!!!

 

[Laura Knotek]

How about Sapphire glass? Glass gives a premium look and feel

I agree. Sapphire glass crystals on watches are nice.

 

[Tafsern]

How about Sapphire glass? Glass gives a premium look and feel

Sapphire glass on a phone is not better than Gorilla Glass. Corning Feature: Gorilla? Glass Now Found On More Than 1.5 Billion Devices

 

[Narathan]

Not to mention the high(er) costs on sapphire glass. this wouldn't do well on sales I bet and people still somehow manage to nick and brick their phones anyway. I seriously know people that toss their device across the room and expect it to remain scratchless.

Anyhow, I *really* hope to see more devices getting that IP certificate. I've lost a handful of devices to rain and to be honest, my Xperia Z is pretty awesome when it comes to it being possible to be cleansed in water to remove all the dust and clutter that builds up in the microphone and speaker grill.

 

[bionicgt]

Well it depends on what you consider "water resistant". And if you're not mixing it with waterproof.

For example, while the Galaxy S5 is IP67, the Xperia Z, Z1, Z1C and Z2 are IP58. Which means that while the S5 can be splattered and quickly washed, it can't be immersed during a long time nor bellow 1m. The Z2, on the other hand, albeit the apparent lower number, CAN be continuously immersed underwater, which makes it waterproof and not just water resistant.

As for me, neither are essential features of a phone. Nokia's build quality make up for the lack of IP certification. And yet the Lumias are water resistant to a certain point. If you quickly drop them under water, it will still work and if you drop your wine over it, it won't die.
I would rather see Sony to a certain degree and certainly Samsung adopting Nokia's build quality than to see Nokia worried about IP certifications.

That doesn't mean they're still one step ahead lol, but anywyas... let's hope Nokia delivers durable phones in the coming months!

 

[three_thoughts]

waterproof phones are annoying because of the flaps covering all the ports. I plug wires into my phone much more often than I get it wet.

 

[Coreldan]

I believe it depents on the kind of work and or hobby's you do.
I worked a lot outside, in wind, snow and rain and sometimes i had to go in the water and dirt.
So yea i think it does matter.
If your always at home or in a nice clean office, shop, school or whatever i think it doesnt realy matters.
But you are a constructionworker or a firefighter or maybe even a soldier than i think it does.

This, for me it really makes no difference. Ofc I wouldn't say no to it, but if it adds fe. more bulk or more price it might not be worth it for me. Then again fe. my dad would have no point in having any phone that isn't dust, water and shock resistant.

 

[maverick786us]

Dust will wear - tear your device, so if its dust resistant, it will make a difference. If you want to take underwater photograph, then if its water resistant, it will matter. For me it is important to be dust resistant

 

[Coreldan]

Dust will wear - tear your device, so if its dust resistant, it will make a difference. If you want to take underwater photograph, then if its water resistant, it will matter. For me it is important to be dust resistant

Water resistant typically isn't enough to save from being submerged, at least not for many seconds, for that it would have to be water PROOF. There have been plenty of sort of.. examples from the court how there is a major difference in these two words. Manufacturers can typically get away with any water damage even if the phone is said to be water resistant. But it's different if it's actually water proof