Tell that to BunnySlippers who charged in like a bull and attacked. Read the opening post, and up to 17 - linked from the story, title straight from the other website, and we were talking WHY it has higher breakage rates.
Then Bunny crashed it, and the crap happened yet again because iPhone fans simply cannot take the truth.
Get some balance, please. You can play peacemaker, but read this thread objectively and you'll see when it went sideways - Bunny charging in and attacking for some grievance from the past. Calling me out and ignoring the reality shows your "peacemaking" is about as one-sided as the UN Security Council.
So, that said, if you have nothing technical to add, why are you here? Yeah, I'm being snippy, but I'm tired of always being attacked and treated as the bad guy (like you're doing here) for reporting OBJECTIVE data, and discussing technical reasons for why it came about. You don't like it? You're free to move to another thread...
Got a problem with it, let's take it to private mail.
First off, let me say I now wish I had made my earlier comment to you privately. That wasn't an appropriate comment for the open thread.
> So, that said, if you have nothing technical to add, why are you here?
Actually, I had intended to add later comments on the technical issue; and you recall I agreed with your technical assessment and said so. But the tone of the thread threw me off, and after that first comment I had to drive to work, so now I'm back...
> Yeah, I'm being snippy, but I'm tired of always being attacked and treated as the bad guy (like you're doing here) for reporting OBJECTIVE data, and discussing technical reasons for why it came about. You don't like it? You're free to move to another thread...
Of course I am, thanks.
Note, however, that I did NOT take issue with you "reporting OBJECTIVE data, and discussing technical reasons for why it came about", whatsoever.
I chided you for -- as I saw it, remember -- setting a trap, gathering the resident anti-Apple folks for what promised to become a bash-fest, and waiting for pro-Apple folks to fall into it. You are free to do that, as I don't think there are any site rules about setting traps or any number of other things. I just thought it was unfortunate and unworthy of you. That's my opinion, you don't have to worry about it.
BTW, I think BunnySlippers was unwise to take the bait and give driftdiver a hard time for posting on an Apple thread. I'm not going to join their pissing match, but it pained me to see that happen. Oh, well.
> Got a problem with it, let's take it to private mail.
On reflection, I should have made my initial comment to you privately, and I now regret that I did not. Sorry about that, learned that lesson I think.
Meanwhile, having thought about the thread topic today, I stand by my comment over here:
Having glass on two sides rather than one presents twice as much chance of something breaking:I will be very interested to see what Apple does in the next release of the iPhone. I expect some changes with regard to the antenna and the glass.3GS = 2.1% cracked the front glass
4 = 3.9% cracked either the front glass or the rear glass
So to me, that sounds about right. Twice as much opportunity for something to break, and twice as many breaks.
I fail to see the big deal in these stats.
That's of course a different question from the technical issue of whether having glass on both sides was a good idea.