T3 Apple iPhone 5.0 review. A more objective review.

[rocketpig]

michael_stutzer said:

Hynad said:

The point of the drop test I posted was to illustrate how good the build quality of the iPhone 5 is, without a shell attached to it. The 4s also had a really good build quality.  Compared to most every other phones out there that are mostly made of cheap plastic and nothing else.

So Iphone 5 has a good build quality because it survives the drop test, but Iphone 4s has a good build quality because?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elKxgsrJFhw

I admire the RDF you guys use.

GS1-2 had really good built qualities. Infact I used to drop the phone everyday just to show people how durable it was. And here is another drop test performed by Cnet: http://cnettv.cnet.com/8301-33814_53-57468819-10391737.html

It is obvious that because of the increased screen size GS3 might be inferior to GS1-2 in durability but I am sure that it is still more durable than 95% of the phones out there today.

When did "durability" become synonymous with "build quality"? The two have little to do with one another. A Faberge egg is terribly fragile but I don't think anyone would claim that its "build quality" is low. Personally, I think Apple made a mistake with the glass-backed 4/4S because it suffered from a functionality standpoint... The phone should survive at least a nominal drop. But that doesn't mean its build quality was low. It was a very well built phone that had some design choices I didn't agree with at the time (and still don't).

The SII/SIII are fine phones with good build quality. Hell, I almost bought an SIII before deciding to wait for the new iPhone 5 instead (screen size and my frustrations with my current Android phone were the main reasons). But if you hold an SIII next to a top of the line Apple or Nokia, its build quality suffers by comparison if only because it uses cheaper components in its construction.