Had the Flip 3 since launch and noticed recently that it's beginning to lift where the screen folds, exactly like this one.
Anyone else had the same thing happen? I'm thinking it should be a warranty repair since this is not an aftermarket add-on?
Samsung Flip 3 Factory Screen Protector Starting to Lift at Middle Hinge
highon2str on 24/07/2022 - 18:27
Comments
if you want to avoid it in the future, you might prefer the surface duo, it's not seamless, but it's a better design.
I went from a Surface Duo to the Fold 3. The Surface Duo definitely isn't as smooth and quick as the Fold 3. It's good for running 2 apps side by side, but the Fold 3 is far better at running one app fullscreen (e.g. browsing a webpage, viewing videos and photos) which I do a lot more often than 2 apps side by side.
The narrower form factor when closed makes it much easier to use one-handed and checking messages or browsing articles is quicker with the front screen. No need to open the phone with two hands just to see what message came in.
using surface duo as a catch all, the duo 2 is out and i think they're working on the 3.
a new phone is snappier than an older one? you're kidding me.
a new phone is snappier than an older
one? you're kidding me.Have you used it?
A Galaxy S20 that's older than the Surface Duo is snappier. Less buggy too.@eug: have you used the duo 2? you may as well compare a windows phone to the z fold 3, it's a pointless comparison because you are comparing old to new.
regardless, i would take a screen without such a glaring design flaw over a slightly faster and newer fold 3, it's just not gonna last.
have you used the duo 2?
You never mentioned the Duo 2 in your original post.
Have you used either the Duo 2? Or 1?
Have you used the Fold 3?Use as in actually use it daily, not playing with a friend's phone for 2 minutes.
you may as well compare a windows phone to the z fold 3, it's a pointless comparison because you are comparing old to new.
You don't have to start clutching at straws like that. You also ignored the part where I said the older S20 is snappier than the Duo.
regardless, i would take a screen without such a glaring design flaw over a slightly faster and newer fold 3, it's just not gonna last.
Heh, it's usually people who have never used a Fold 3 who assume it won't last.
@eug: i'm mentioning it now and i already explained that, if you would like to refer to the previous comment.
have you used the duo 2?
You don't have to start clutching at straws like that. You also ignored the part where I said the older S20 is snappier than the Duo.
it's not clutching at straws, you are comparing an outdated device to a current device, apples to oranges, if that is your criteria, any comparison is pointless because you are clutching at straws and being disingenuous, at best.
Heh, it's usually people who have never used a Fold 3 who assume it won't last.
you can throw a rock and hit 3 people who have had problems with the "bendable" screen failing. if you want to burn money, who am i to stop you? it's your money, just stop pretending that it's something it isn't.
even you had this problem with your device, and you have the gall to say it will last? i think that is a good example of your credibility.
you are comparing an outdated device to a current device
Once again, you're ignoring the part where I said the older S20 is snappier than the Duo.
I will skip the rest of your reply regarding devices you have not used so you can directly address the above and not practice selective reading.
@eug: once again, you compare apples to oranges.
i took you at your word before, but i just checked, yes, the s20 is older, by 6 months, it's also a flagship device with a tried and tested design, their flagship series no less, compared to the duo, which is more of a proof of concept. another example of you being disingenuous.
the s20 uses a newer chipset, compared to the slightly older chipset of the original duo, which makes sense, as they are coming out with a new device, not just iterating on something they've already released before, like samsung.
I will skip the rest of your reply regarding devices you have not used so you can directly address the above and not practice selective reading.
@[Deactivated]: Great, glad you finally read what I typed.
Summary:
You suggest the Surface Duo as a better alternative to the Fold 3.
I replied saying the Surface Duo isn't as smooth and quick as the Fold 3, the Duo is better for running 2 apps side by side, the Fold 3 is better at running one app fullscreen, and the narrower form factor of the Fold 3 makes it easier to use one-handed when closed.
You ignore all my points and say you actually meant the Surface Duo 2 when you said Surface Duo. You also say the Fold 3 should be faster because it's newer.
I reply saying the S20, which is older than the Duo, is snappier and less buggy.
You ignore my reply saying the older S20 is snappier than the newer Duo, and start talking about the Duo 2 and Windows phones and say I shouldn't be comparing the Duo to a newer phone even though the very post you were replying to was comparing an older phone to the Duo.
Then it just devolves into pointlessness.
I'm not sure why you have such a dislike towards a device you have not used, and an affinity towards another device that you have also not used. Maybe read through my first reply and try and understand that I am not attacking your suggestion, I just gave an account of my personal experiences with both devices highlighting what they're both good at.
You suggest the Surface Duo as a better alternative to the Fold 3.
already explained.
You ignore my reply saying the older S20 is snappier than the newer Duo, and start talking about the Duo 2 and Windows phones and say I shouldn't be comparing the Duo to a newer phone even though the very post you were replying to was comparing an older phone to the Duo.
apparently someone isn't aware of "apples and oranges"
Then it just devolves into pointlessness.
yes, it devolved into pointlessness the minute you decided to compare two very different devices, with different use cases.
I'm not sure why you have such a dislike towards a device you have not used
i dislike the fact that people try and pretend it is a long lasting & durable device, when all evidence points to the contrary.
yes, it devolved into pointlessness the minute you decided to compare two very different devices, with different use cases.
Are you referring to when you suggested the Surface Duo as an alternative to the Fold 3? They both have different use cases.
@eug: no, i'm referring to when you compared a galaxy s20, of all things, to a surface duo.
the surface duo 2 is quite possibly the only phone that can be properly compared to the fold 3, at least if we are talking about current phones.
what are the "different use cases" of a fold vs a duo? they are both aimed at multitasking, just going about it in a slightly different way.
no, i'm referring to when you compared a galaxy s20, of all things, to a surface duo.
They both run Android. One runs it more smoothly and bug-free than the other.
Even the Fold 2, which was released at the same time as the Duo, runs smoother with far fewer bugs than the Duo.what are the "different use cases" of a fold vs a duo? they are both aimed at multitasking, just going about it in a slightly different way.
The Duo is better at running two apps side by side because of the screen's aspect ratio, and because it is literally two separate screens side by side. You can open an app fullscreen on each side and the apps look normal. If you want to focus on one app you can just fold the Duo the other way and use one screen like a normal single-screen phone. But that also means if you want to watch a video, read a PDF, or browse a website, you have to drag and drop it to the gap in the centre which doesn't always work the first time, and you'll have a large gap in the centre.
The Fold can run multiple apps at the same time but the screen's aspect ratio means you'll have two narrow skinny windows side by side. Not all apps work well with such a narrow window. But if you want to watch a video, PDF, website etc you will have one large seamless screen which works much better than two screens with a gap in the middle. And no, the crease is not a big deal unless you are looking for something to complain about.
The Duo is a dual-screen phone.
The Fold is a large single-screen phone that folds.They both run Android.
so do home security systems, fridges, cameras, sat nav & smart watches, all of which are as good a comparison to the duo as the s20 is, which is to say, not at all.
so more or less the same use cases, done in different ways.
And no, the crease is not a big deal unless you are looking for something to complain about.
i would say a common failure point is not a small thing, but as long as you keep getting free repairs… though i wonder how long that you will be able to get them, before they start charging, as a warranty usually only covers the item you buy, not the replacement, which is a problem in this case especially, as this isn't an isolated case, or caused by accident, it's an inherent design flaw and will continue to fail at that same spot.
so do home security systems, fridges, cameras, sat nav & smart watches, all of which are as good a comparison to the duo as the s20 is, which is to say, not at all.
Once again, you don't have to clutch at straws like that. And you also don't have to ignore the part where I said the Fold 2 is smoother and less buggy than the Surface Duo, both of which were released at the same time.
i would say a common failure point is not a small thing,
I find it amusing how you call a peeling screen protector a "failure point".
Or are you actually unaware that the screen is completely unaffected and that it is just the plastic screen protector on it that peels?
@eug: once again, you are projecting your own actions. we have gone over this.
the screen protector is the start, the crease will continue to, well, crease, or in the case of those unlucky to have their phones just crack, among other display issues. it's not an uncommon issue with these phones, which is not surprising, as they are poorly designed. just another consumable product to throw away, planned obsolescence at work.
the screen protector is the start, the crease will continue to, well, crease,
The peeling is the screen protector.
Are you basing your dislike of the Fold solely on what you read on forums? Are you aware of publication and confirmation bias?
@eug: you misunderstand, the screen will continue to crease, unless it cracks first.
i'm basing it on the evidence, unlike some.
i'm aware of confirmation bias, but it goes both ways.
you misunderstand, the screen will continue to crease, unless it cracks first.
i'm basing it on the evidence, unlike some.OK, what is your evidence?
Out of the estimated 7.1 million Fold3 and Flip3 phones that were sold in 2021, how many screens have permanent damage? Not screen protectors as you say - screens.@[Deactivated]: So based on your quality of evidence, iPhones commonly catch fire, and the Surface Duo commonly cracks?
Evidently you're not aware of what confirmation bias is. :)
@eug: we're back to compared outdated devices again? sigh.
are you aware of the dunning-kruger effect?
@[Deactivated]: So we've established that your "evidence" is just a google search. That's really all we need to know. :)
@eug: We've established that you are incapable of doing a google search, that's all we need to know :)
@[Deactivated]: You being so confident that your google search is irrefutable proof of your assertion is a classic case of confirmation bias. It happens frequently enough that there's a whole section in Wikipedia's confirmation bias page. It specifically talks about biased searches for information.
If there's one useful thing that comes out of this mildly amusing thread, hopefully it's that you realise the above.
@eug: to find something, yes, you have to look for it. you can't just expect things to pop out of google as you need them.
i acknowledge confirmation bias, it's just not present here (at least on my part), continuing to accuse me of it is not going to make it true, no matter how many times you write it.
you've been provided with evidence, as well as the ability to look for yourself, yet you still choose to stick your head in the stand and pretend that you can't see what you don't agree with.
you're not going to agree with any evidence presented because it does not fit what you believe about the device.
you've been provided with evidence
The evidence you provided is a google search for "fold 3 screen failure".
The way a search engine works is, it will return results that relate to your search terms.
It does not tell you how common or uncommon a problem is.
My reply included a search link for "iphone battery fire". If you search for that you'll get plenty of results. But does that mean iPhones commonly catch fire?
No. Google returns those results because that is what you searched for. The fact that there are results does not mean it's a common occurence.
Your evidence never answered the question - out of the 7 million Fold and Flip devices sold in 2021, how many million have had broken screens? Provide a number or a percentage. Not a generic search result.
The evidence you provided is a google search for "fold 3 screen failure".
yes, it has all the information you need.
It does not tell you how common or uncommon a problem is.
the only people who have that data are samsung, and they are not likely to release it, for obvious reasons.
No. Google returns those results because that is what you searched for. The fact that there are results does not mean it's a common occurence.
yes, because to find something, you have to search for it. google is not a mind reader. frankly, i'm wondering how i am supposed to find this data you keep insisting i give you (which only samsung has) if i am not allowed to search for it? your demand is illogical; "Search for this very specific data, but also searching = confirmation bias"
Your evidence never answered the question - out of the 7 million Fold and Flip devices sold in 2021, how many million have had broken screens? Provide a number or a percentage. Not a generic search result.
go ask samsung, i'm sure they'd love to tell you. let me know how it goes.
yes, because to find something, you have to search for it.
So how do you conclude from a google search result that is a common occurence?
Going by your method, does that mean iPhones catching fire is a common occurence too?
Do you see the problem with your method of deduction?
@eug: because the flaw is evident, as well as the common occurrence of people reporting issues with the fold screen, particularly the thin glass at the point where it folds.
that's your method, i'm not getting into iphones.
because the flaw is evident, as well as the common occurrence of people reporting issues with the fold screen, particularly the thin glass at the point where it folds.
Once again, how did you conclude that it is a common occurrence from a google search? Of course you're going to find people talking about issues with the screen - it's because you specifically searched for that. If 1000 people had issues with their screen and talk about it online, you will see those 1000 complaints because that is what you searched for.
But you will not see the other 6.9+ million people who did not have issues.
i'm not getting into iphones.
Sure, because it points out the problem with your method of deduction.
You suggested the Surface Duo as an alternative to the Fold. Going by your method, does this Google search prove conclusively that cracked Surface Duos are a common occurrence? Clearly it's a design flaw then. Why did you suggest a flawed device as an alternative?
Once again, how did you conclude that it is a common occurrence from a google search? Of course you're going to find people talking about issues with the screen - it's because you specifically searched for that. If 1000 people had issues with their screen and talk about it online, you will see those 1000 complaints because that is what you searched for.
because it's commonly reported. it's that simple. you can like the phone, it doesn't make it durable or long lasting.
Sure, because it points out the problem with your method of deduction.
because it's irrelevant, it's your strawman.
You suggested the Surface Duo as an alternative to the Fold. Going by your method, does this Google search prove conclusively that cracked Surface Duos are a common occurrence? Clearly it's a design flaw then. Why did you suggest a flawed device as an alternative?
yes, that is a design flaw, but again, that is the previous, outdated model. it seems that your only tactic is to bring up old and / or irrelevant devices or tell me to search for something and then say that by searching for it, i am guilty of confirmation bias.
I have already explained my reasoning behind the use of "surface duo", that was my mistake, as i assumed there would not be any pedants here. it would be quite clear if someone were to search for "surface duo" that there is a surface duo 2, as it appears in the search suggestions, as well as on the first page of results, in fact, it is the second result when you just search for "surface duo" if you ignore the search suggestion for the surface duo 2.
because it's commonly reported.
You still don't seem to understand how search engines work. When you search for specific terms, you will get results for those terms. It doesn't conclusively show that the issue you searched for is a common problem - you're seeing lots of results because that is what you searched for.
because it's irrelevant,
Once again, it's because it shows the deficiencies with your methodology.
yes, that is a design flaw, but again, that is the previous, outdated model.
OK, so when you do a search for surface duo 2 touchscreen issues there are plenty of issues that are reported. Does that mean the Surface Duo 2 commonly has touchscreen issues, or was it because I specifically searched for touchscreen issues?
Once again, it's because it shows the deficiencies with your methodology.
a strawman is not an example of my methodology.
OK, so when you do a search for surface duo 2 touchscreen issues there are plenty of issues that are reported. Does that mean the Surface Duo 2 commonly has touchscreen issues, or was it because I specifically searched for touchscreen issues?
that's interesting, i hadn't seen those. perhaps dual screen devices still need a few more years in the oven, though with a quick glance at the forums, the issues with the duo look to be software related, rather than the hardware related issues that the fold has.
a strawman is not an example of my methodology.
Your methodology:
- Google specific terms
- Google returns results with your specific terms
- Getting results on Google is conclusive proof that what you searched for is a common occurrence.If you can't see the problem with your methodology, once again I would suggest you read this.
though with a quick glance at the forums, the issues with the duo look to be software related,
The Surface Duo 2 was released in October 2021. It has been out for 9 months and people are still reporting touch issues in July 2022. If it was software-related you'd think the biggest software company in the world would fix such a serious usability issue nine months after releasing their one current phone.
Or, it is also possible that there's a small number of Duo 2 phones out there with hardware issues and those are the complaints you see online, while everyone else with Surface Duo 2 phones who don't have touch issues are simply using their phones and not looking for online forums to write posts saying "My phone works fine".
If you search for something, you will find results. It doesn't mean what you searched for is a common issue.
The more popular a device is, the more search results you will get simply because there's more of them out there. The actual defect rate can still be the same as other similar devices.
If Microsoft sold 100,000 Duo phones and they have a 1% defect rate, there would be 1,000 dissatisfied customers. If 10% of those dissatisfied customers decide to post on forums about it, there'll be at least 100 complaints online.
If Samsung sold 7 million Fold/Flip3 phones and they have a 1% defect rate, there would be 70,000 dissatisfied customers. If 10% of them post on forums, there would be at least 7,000 complaints online - 70x more than the Duo 2.
Does that mean the Fold/Flip 3 is built worse than the Duo 2? No - the defect rate is the same.
Doing a Google search will return more results simply because there's more of them out there - so of course you will find more complaints.
@eug: I saw the reported issues without googling as i was just browsing the internet, you asked me for specific cases, you got specific cases, i don't know what you are expecting when you ask for evidence if you dont want evidence?
The Surface Duo 2 was released in October 2021. It has been out for 9 months and people are still reporting touch issues in July 2022. If it was software-related you'd think the biggest software company in the world would fix such a serious usability issue nine months after releasing their one current phone.
yes and no, microsoft are a big company, it's likely they are not too concerned about it, given the duo 2 is such a small part of their sales compared to everything else.
it's possible, but unlikely, the suggested fixes had a common theme, being that designed to solve software issues (restart device, fresh install etc) and people reported those to be working.
Does that mean the Fold/Flip 3 is built worse than the Duo 2? No - the defect rate is the same.
that on it's own; no, but is inherently less durable because of the folding screen, whereas the duo 2 gets around that by having 2 separate screens that have a thin bezel between them.
many of the reports about the fold 3 had the owner put it down, come back it later and open it to find that the middle of the screen ( the folding part ) had cracked, which got worse with each open and close of the device.
I saw the reported issues without googling as i was just browsing the internet
As I said previously, the more popular a device is, the more likely you'll come across people talking about the device.
you asked me for specific cases,
Please point out where I asked for specific cases.
you got specific cases
I never asked for specific cases, I'm not sure why you're making things up like that.
You were adamant that screen failures (not screen protector peeling) was common. I asked you for evidence. What makes you so certain that it was a common occurrence, i.e. affects a high percentage of devices?
All you did was provide a google search link which did not answer the question. I have already explained above why your methodology is flawed. A page of search results does not show how common a problem is, it just shows that people have experienced the problem. The more devices are sold, the greater the number of reports there will be. What matters is the percentage of faulty devices.
yes and no, microsoft are a big company, it's likely they are not too concerned about it, given the duo 2 is such a small part of their sales compared to everything else.
So are you saying Microsoft released a flawed device twice and aren't bothering to fix it?
Touchscreen issues are common with the Surface Duo 2? i.e. a high percentage of Surface Duo 2 phones sold will suffer from touchscreen issues?That sounds like a pretty poor recommendation then.
many of the reports about the fold 3 had the owner put it down
You're still unable or unwilling to understand the problem with your methodology. Re-read my previous reply and try and understand why your reasoning is flawed. As I mentioned above, what you're doing is such a common occurrence that it has its own section on the wikipedia confirmation bias page. It's understandable that you think that way, but it's a pity that you're unable to even accept the possibility that you might not be interpreting search results the right way.
@eug: evidence, cases, same thing.
You were adamant that screen failures (not screen protector peeling) was common. I asked you for evidence. What makes you so certain that it was a common occurrence, i.e. affects a high percentage of devices?
no, i was adamant that the device has a design flaw, which it does. i provided evidence (cases) at your request.
All you did was provide a google search link which did not answer the question. I have already explained above why your methodology is flawed. A page of search results does not show how common a problem is, it just shows that people have experienced the problem. The more devices are sold, the greater the number of reports there will be. What matters is the percentage of faulty devices.
yes, because you want the actual data that samsung has, which is a ludicrous request, as samsung does not give that data out, that is where your methodology is flawed.
So are you saying Microsoft released a flawed device twice and aren't bothering to fix it?
Touchscreen issues are common with the Surface Duo 2? i.e. a high percentage of Surface Duo 2 phones sold will suffer from touchscreen issues?That sounds like a pretty poor recommendation then.
flawed software can be fixed with updates, flawed hardware is fixed with the next iteration, at least it should be, the technology for folding phones just isn't there yet, it doesn't allow for long lasting, flexible screens. i would take flawed software over flawed hardware any day of the week.
You're still unable or unwilling to understand the problem with your methodology. Re-read my previous reply and try and understand why your reasoning is flawed. As I mentioned above, what you're doing is such a common occurrence that it has its own section on the wikipedia confirmation bias page. It's understandable that you think that way, but it's a pity that you're unable to even accept the possibility that you might not be interpreting search results the right way.
the problem with my methodology is that you keep changing goal posts and you want something that no one but samsung has access to.
constantly circling back to a wikipedia page that has no relevance here is where your methodology fails, you think that it applies here, but it doesn't.
no, i was adamant that the device has a design flaw, which it does.
You claimed it is common for the phone to experience a damaged screen.
You have not explained how you came to the conclusion that it is a common occurrence.The only thing you have provided is a google search link that shows people have experienced the problem. It does not show how common it is. The more devices are sold, the more people will experience issues. What matters is the percentage of devices that have the problem - that is how you tell whether or not a problem is common.
yes, because you want the actual data that samsung has, which is a ludicrous request, as samsung does not give that data out,
So you are finally admitting that you do not actually know how common the issue is? That's great.
that is where your methodology is flawed.
What methodology? You made a statement, I asked for the reasoning behind the statement, you were unable to provide any evidence to back your statement.
i would take flawed software over flawed hardware any day of the week.
I find it amusing that you're unable or unwilling to accept the possibility that it might only be a small percentage of Surface Duo 2 phones - i.e. the ones that have a hardware fault - that experience touchscreen issues.
Instead you would rather believe that every single Duo 2 in existence is next to unusable (unusable as reported by the forum posts), even the review units that have gone out where the reviewers don't mention it. If it was a software fault, every single unit would have the fault. If it was a hardware fault, only units with the fault would show those issues.
the problem with my methodology is that you keep changing goal posts
I have not changed or moved anything. The question remains the same.
You keep skirting the question, clutch at straws, do not understand how confirmation bias works, do not understand how search engines work, do not understand how online commenting works, do not understand the difference between absolute and relative numbers, do not understand failure rates, and are not willing to even consider the possibility that you're not interpreting search results correctly.
I've tried to help you understand why your methodology is flawed, but you're so strongly affected by confirmation bias that you are unable to see the broader picture. There's not much else I can do; if you want to continue living blinded like that, go ahead. I just hope the next time you're in a discussion with someone, you accept the possibility that you might be incorrect.
Have a read of that wikipedia page. It might help you see what you're doing.
You claimed it is common for the phone to experience a damaged screen.
You have not explained how you came to the conclusion that it is a common occurrence.i have, you ignored it.
So you are finally admitting that you do not actually know how common the issue is? That's great.
i don't know how common it is, but i do know that it isn't uncommon, yes.
What methodology? You made a statement, I asked for the reasoning behind the statement, you were unable to provide any evidence to back your statement.
i provided reasoning, you don't accept it, the reasoning stands.
I find it amusing that you're unable or unwilling to accept the possibility that it might only be a small percentage of Surface Duo 2 phones - i.e. the ones that have a hardware fault - that experience touchscreen issues.
Instead you would rather believe that every single Duo 2 in existence is next to unusable (unusable as reported by the forum posts), even the review units that have gone out where the reviewers don't mention it. If it was a software fault, every single unit would have the fault. If it was a hardware fault, only units with the fault would show those issues.
i'm willing to accept that the surface duo issues might be experienced by only a small percentage of users, i don't believe it is a hardware issue.
not sure where you're getting the idea that i believe every single duo 2 is next to unusable from, but i am not surprised that you have concluded that, given your flawed reasoning and unreasonable demands.
If it was a software fault, every single unit would have the fault. If it was a hardware fault, only units with the fault would show those issues.
you can't be serious? lol
I have not changed or moved anything. The question remains the same.
you asked for evidence, i provided it, then you wanted samsungs data on what percentage of phones have this issue.
You keep skirting the question, clutch at straws, do not understand how confirmation bias works, do not understand how search engines work, do not understand how online commenting works, do not understand the difference between absolute and relative numbers, do not understand failure rates, and are not willing to even consider the possibility that you're not interpreting search results correctly.
congratulations on projecting your own actions on to me, yet again.
I've tried to help you understand why your methodology is flawed, but you're so strongly affected by confirmation bias that you are unable to see the broader picture. There's not much else I can do; if you want to continue living blinded like that, go ahead.
you've done nothing of the sort, you've wrongly accused me of confirmation bias multiple times, and refused to accept that you are incorrect.
I just hope the next time you're in a discussion with someone, you accept the possibility that you might be incorrect.
i will, when i am actually incorrect.
Have a read of that wikipedia page. It might help you see what you're doing.
i can't help it if you misunderstand it.
you asked for evidence, i provided it, then you wanted samsungs data on what percentage of phones have this issue.
You made the claim that broken screens is a common issue.
You were unable to provide any evidence that it is a common issue. All you did was provide a link that shows people have experienced the issue.The crux of this is that you do not understand how a search engine works. If you search for something, you will get results that relate to your search.
Your web search does not show whether or not the issue commonly affects all Fold phones. It only shows that people have experienced the issue. With over 7 million phones in the wild, there will definitely be people who have experienced faulty screens.
You do not understand the difference between absolute and relative numbers.
You do not understand what confirmation bias is. The search link that you provided is exactly what is described in that confirmation bias link I sent. But because you're so affected by it, you are unable or unwilling to see it.
You made the claim that broken screens is a common issue.
You were unable to provide any evidence that it is a common issue. All you did was provide a link that shows people have experienced the issue.i provided evidence, you don't accept it, the evidence still stands.
The crux of this is that you do not understand how a search engine works. If you search for something, you will get results that relate to your search.
and you asked for evidence, i gave it, i can't find evidence if i don't look for it. the real crux of the issue is that you created a trap, asking for evidence, then saying that by looking for said evidence, i am guilty of confirmation bias.
Your web search does not show whether or not the issue commonly affects all Fold phones. It only shows that people have experienced the issue. With over 7 million phones in the wild, there will definitely be people who have experienced faulty screens.
it shows that it isn't an uncommon issue, as time goes on, more and more people will suffer, as it is a device that simply won't last (without repairs) as the flexible screen technology still needs more time.
You do not understand what confirmation bias is. The search link that you provided is exactly what is described in that confirmation bias link I sent. But because you're so affected by it, you are unable or unwilling to see it.
it seems you don't understand what it is.
i provided evidence, you don't accept it, the evidence still stands.
I've repeated myself so many times - your 'evidence' is a classic demonstration of confirmation bias. So classic that it has its own category.
You don't seem to be able to understand that a google search for a specific problem will give you results for that specific problem. That is how a search engine works. It doesn't show how common the issue is, it just shows that people have experienced the issue.
The more popular a device, the more comments you will see because there's more of the device out there. It doesn't mean the failure rate is higher - the percentage can be the same as other devices, but the greater number of units out there means you will see more comments about it.
@eug: you don't seem to understand that you can't find something without looking for it.
it's a design fault, the more time that goes on, the more people that will experience the issue.
you don't seem to understand that you can't find something without looking for it.
You're still not grasping the difference between relative and absolute numbers. It's not the absolute number of failures that's important, it's the number of failures relative to the number of devices sold that's important. You are only looking at one part of the equation and coming to a flawed conclusion.
it's a design fault, the more time that goes on, the more people that will experience the issue.
The Galaxy Fold 2 has been out for just about 2 years now. Why isn't OzB filled with people complaining about their broken screen?
You're still not grasping the difference between relative and absolute numbers. It's not the absolute number of failures that's important, it's the number of failures relative to the number of devices sold that's important. You are only looking at one part of the equation and coming to a flawed conclusion.
you're still moving the goalpost, to data that is conveniently only available to samsung.
The Galaxy Fold 2 has been out for just about 2 years now. Why isn't OzB filled with people complaining about their broken screen?
because ozbargain are here for bargains, not duds. the fold is a $2,500 dollar one. it's the same reason you don't see ozbargain complaining about their brand new audis / BMWs / landcruiser 200 series wait times or missing features because of the chip shortage
you're still moving the goalpost, to data that is conveniently only available to samsung.
Nothing has moved. The question has always been the same since the start.
You made a claim that screen failures are common. I asked what you based that claim on. All you were able to provide is a google search link that shows that people have experienced issues. It did not show how common the issue is. Evidently you made a claim based on a flawed assumption as you weren't aware as to how failure rates should be considered.
because ozbargain are here for bargains, not duds. the fold is a $2,500 dollar one. it's the same reason you don't see ozbargain complaining about their brand new audis / BMWs
You must be new here. Ozbargainers won't pay $2500 for a $2500 phone. They will pay $1049 though. Or even $1624. Even at $1999 it was popular.
If most of their phones cracked, we'd definitely hear about it in every Fold3 post.
@eug: I made a valid claim, time will tell. As no one has access to Samsung's data, you are not going to be able to see it. The google link shows that it is not an uncommon issue, with more use, the screen will be exposed to more stress, until eventually it breaks, unless you are one of the unlucky ones that had theirs spontaneously crack not long after purchase.
None of those are the fold 3, they are the fold 2.. and we wouldn't be hearing about it on those posts as the furthest apart has only a 4 month gap. Having said that, there are a few comments complaining about hardware faults, one had their screen crack, the other saw a few posts about the same thing happening, though I suppose you'll accuse them of confirmation bias.
The google link shows that it is not an uncommon issue
You're still missing the point. If you search for something, you will find it.
Would you say iPhones catching fire is a common occurrence? No, it isn't. But if you did a google search for it you'll find plenty of people saying theirs caught fire. Going by your logic, you would be telling everyone that iphones catching fire is not an uncommon occurrence because your google search link shows people talking about it.
Simply searching for a specific term and getting results doesn't mean the thing you searched for is a common issue. It just means people have experienced the issue. If you sell over 7 million of something, you're bound to find a good number of people who have experienced the issue. It's the percentage failure rate that's important, not the absolute number.
None of those are the fold 3, they are the fold 2
So the older phone with older technology had no issues. Why would you expect the newer improved screen to have more issues?
Having said that, there are a few comments complaining about hardware faults, one had their screen crack, the other saw a few posts about the same thing happening, though I suppose you'll accuse them of confirmation bias.
Here's another absolutely classic case of confirmation bias on your part. Notice how you only mention the comments that describe faults while completely ignoring the comments by people saying they had no issues?
You're still missing the point. If you search for something, you will find it.
you're still missing the point, you have to search for something to find it.
Would you say iPhones catching fire is a common occurrence?
irrelevant, i'm not talking about iphones.
Simply searching for a specific term and getting results doesn't mean the thing you searched for is a common issue. It just means people have experienced the issue. If you sell over 7 million of something, you're bound to find a good number of people who have experienced the issue. It's the percentage failure rate that's important, not the absolute number.
it's not an uncommon issue.
So the older phone with older technology had no issues. Why would you expect the newer improved screen to have more issues?
no, i'm just pointing out that the fold 3 is priced at $2,500. you can get a high quality smartphone for 700 or less during sales, most would prefer not to spend $1,000 + on a phone.
Here's another absolutely classic case of confirmation bias on your part. Notice how you only mention the comments that describe faults while completely ignoring the comments by people saying they had no issues?
incorrect. the vast majority of comments on those posts are from people who don't actually have the phone, there are a very small number from those that do have the phone and even still there are people who have experienced issues, as well as seen other people who have had the same issues, less than a year after the phones release (september 2020)
you're still missing the point, you have to search for something to find it.
Sure. But you have to know how to interpret the results correctly. Using flawed logic results in a flawed conclusion.
irrelevant, i'm not talking about iphones.
It was an example to demonstrate your flawed logic.
no, i'm just pointing out that the fold 3 is priced at $2,500. you can get a high quality smartphone for 700 or less during sales, most would prefer not to spend $1,000 + on a phone.
Read your comment again. I asked, if the Fold commonly experiences cracked screens, why isn't OzB filled with people complaining about their cracked screens?
You said it's because OzB users are here for bargains and not $2,500 phones. You further gave the example of there not being many complaints about expensive vehicles like BMWs and Audis (irrelevant, i'm not talking about BMWs and Audis).
I pointed out that OzB users do buy $2,500 phones - they just pay $1049-$1999 for them. So there are plenty of OzB users who have bought the older Fold 2 that does not have the significant reliability improvements that the Fold 3 has.
So why hasn't everyone's Fold 2 screen cracked? If it's a common occurrence as you say, I would expect there to be plenty of people mentioning it in every Fold 3 post.
Also do note that the Surface Duo 2 that you suggested as an alternative costs $2,319.
the vast majority of comments on those posts are from people who don't actually have the phone, there are a very small number from those that do have the phone and even still there are people who have experienced issues, as well as seen other people who have had the same issues, less than a year after the phones release (september 2020)
Once again, you are showing that you do not understand the difference between absolute and relative numbers. I've repeated it so many times and you are still unable to grasp the concept, so there's really not much point in explaining it again.
Sure. But you have to know how to interpret the results correctly. Using flawed logic results in a flawed conclusion.
it's a good thing i'm not using flawed logic.
It was an example to demonstrate your flawed logic.
incorrect.
Read your comment again. I asked, if the Fold commonly experiences cracked screens, why isn't OzB filled with people complaining about their cracked screens?
You said it's because OzB users are here for bargains and not $2,500 phones. You further gave the example of there not being many complaints about expensive vehicles like BMWs and Audis (irrelevant, i'm not talking about BMWs and Audis).
I pointed out that OzB users do buy $2,500 phones - they just pay $1049-$1999 for them. So there are plenty of OzB users who have bought the older Fold 2 that does not have the significant reliability improvements that the Fold 3 has.
So why hasn't everyone's Fold 2 screen cracked? If it's a common occurrence as you say, I would expect there to be plenty of people mentioning it in every Fold 3 post.
in this more recent post, there are more users complaining about the phone breaking.
Also do note that the Surface Duo 2 that you suggested as an alternative costs $2,319.
since you're including sales, the duo 2 recently went on sale for $1,500, twice.
example one
example two
it's a good thing i'm not using flawed logic.
OK, your loss. Hopefully one day you'll entertain the possibility that in life, sometimes you might be mistaken.
in this more recent post, there are more users complaining about the phone breaking.
That's fantastic! An absolutely classic case of confirmation bias.
Open the page again and do a ctrl-f for "screen" and read every single comment.
1 person, Turbonetics, said his Fold 2 (the less durable model as I linked to above) had a faulty screen.
1 person, firebladepat, said his Flip 3 is developing a crack/crease. Someone else replied to him saying it could just be the screen protector. firebladepat never replied to confirm if it was the screen protector or an actual broken screen.
Now ctrl-f "protector" and count the number of people who mention their screen protector was peeling. Their screen is fine, it's just the protector that peeled. I stopped counting at 8.
That is a classic demonstration of confirmation bias. The link you sent had one person confirming his last-generation phone had a screen fault, and at least eight confirmed people who own a folding phone whose screen is fine, but have a peeling screen protector. You ignore the 8 reports that don't support your claim and focus on the 1 report that does, and call it "more users".
Classic. :)
since you're including sales, the duo 2 recently went on sale for $1,500, twice.
$1,500! you can get a high quality smartphone for 700 or less during sales, most would prefer not to spend $1,000 + on a phone.
OK, your loss. Hopefully one day you'll entertain the possibility that in life, sometimes you might be mistaken.
i entertain the possibility all the time, i am just not mistaken here.
That's fantastic! An absolutely classic case of confirmation bias.
1 person, firebladepat, said his Flip 3 is developing a crack/crease. Someone else replied to him saying it could just be the screen protector. firebladepat never replied to confirm if it was the screen protector or an actual broken screen.
it's ironic you accuse me of confirmation bias. 2 more users who replied to firebladepat also had the same issue, with one even complaining that the hinge no longer works properly. you'll claim that it's "just the screen protector" i'm sure
another comment by vinni also complains about it.
on the second page, there is a user who says that they bought the phone, as well as care+ and had to use that care+, i wonder what for? 🤔 surely a screen protector cost the $149 that they claimed on it.
That is a classic demonstration of confirmation bias. The link you sent had one person confirming his last-generation phone had a screen fault, and at least eight confirmed people who own a folding phone whose screen is fine, but have a peeling screen protector. You ignore the 8 reports that don't support your claim and focus on the 1 report that does, and call it "more users".
you ignore the reports about the failing screen and wave them under the "screen protector" basket, because a couple of others had issues with the screen protector, when all the reports of screen failure start with a small crack at the crease, but hey, you can just keep repeating confirmation bias as if you've never seen a mirror.
2 more users who replied to firebladepat also had the same issue
What "same issue"? firebladepat did not clarify if it was the screen protector or the screen itself. I already mentioned Turbonetics' previous-generation Fold 2 in my reply above. Who are these two more users and what issue did they have?
another comment by vinni also complains about it.
vinni does not say if the problem is the screen or the screen protector. A broken or damaged screen will have display issues like black or coloured lines running across. A plastic-looking crease, as he describes, sounds more like the plastic screen protector peeling.
when all the reports of screen failure start with a small crack at the crease
You are mixing up a peeling screen protector with actual screen failure. They are two different things.
Anyway, it is very clear that this will go nowhere. You've never used the phone, never seen the peeling screen protector in person, do not understand how to interpret search results, do not understand the difference between absolute and relative numbers, and are unable to see the effects of confirmation bias.
I don't think there's much else I can add to this since you seem to be of the opinion that it is impossible for you to be mistaken, and completely ignore or do not understand my reasonings as to why your methodology is flawed.
So rather than waste more time repeating myself and addressing your moving goalposts, I'll just leave it at that. You can continue to believe that your logic is sound at your own peril. The next time you enter a discussion like this, do consider the possibility that you can sometimes be mistaken.
What "same issue"? firebladepat did not clarify if it was the screen protector or the screen itself. I already mentioned Turbonetics' previous-generation Fold 2 in my reply above. Who are these two more users and what issue did they have?
Mugen, The General & DumplingBoi
A broken or damaged screen will have display issues like black or coloured lines running across. A plastic-looking crease, as he describes, sounds more like the plastic screen protector peeling.
like this?
You are mixing up a peeling screen protector with actual screen failure. They are two different things.
no, you are pretending that screen failures are just the screen protectors peeling.
Anyway, it is very clear that this will go nowhere. You've never used the phone, never seen the peeling screen protector in person, do not understand how to interpret search results, do not understand the difference between absolute and relative numbers, and are unable to see the effects of confirmation bias.
some things correct; i don't own the phone, haven't seen it in person
some things incorrect; i know how to interpret search results, i understand the difference, and am able to see confirmation bias (when it's actually there)
I don't think there's much else I can add to this since you seem to be of the opinion that it is impossible for you to be mistaken, and completely ignore or do not understand my reasonings as to why your methodology is flawed.
i've already said that i am willing to entertain the possibility that i am mistaken, when i am actually mistaken. i understand your reasonings, they are just wrong.
So rather than waste more time repeating myself and addressing your moving goalposts, I'll just leave it at that. You can continue to believe that your logic is sound at your own peril. The next time you enter a discussion like this, do consider the possibility that you can sometimes be mistaken.
you've been provided with evidence, you choose to ignore it, that's not my problem.
and am able to see confirmation bias (when it's actually there)
you've been provided with evidence,
:)
Have a good rest of the week!
sounds more like the plastic screen protector peeling.
You are mixing up a peeling screen protector with actual screen failure. They are two different things.
unable to see the effects of confirmation bias.
you too :)
That happened to my Fold 3. I brought it to a Samsung service centre, they replaced it on the spot for free, no questions or hassles. I got them to replace the front for free too, even though it was fine.
I bought mine in November last year, mine is also starting to lift in the middle exactly the same as that photo. I was hoping they would replace the protector on the spot next time i'm at the Sydney store in George St.
I called the service centre (Tecworks Banyo) first. They didn't have it in stock so they ordered a few in and contacted me when it arrived. I went in and they swapped it on the spot, took maybe 20 mins. They actually did it twice; the tech said he wasn't satisfied with his first application so he removed it and did it again. So it's good idea to call them first.
Ah, good to hear that Samsung are replacing it under warranty! 👍
Had the same issue, went to the George st store. They sent to phone off to replace it. Wish they could just do it in store somewhere, as they need access to my phone to run diagnostics. Everything else was fine with the phone other than the screen protector.
Why did they need to run diagnostics just to replace a screen protector??
Thats unknown to me, it went off to the service center and pretty much wasn't coming back until i gave them the password.
I replaced the screen protector on my Z Fold 2 myself - it's not nearly as scary as people say. Worked as well as replacing any old screen protector! But if you can replace under warranty - do that instead.
it's a design flaw, inevitable with bending screens.
try your luck with samsung, but their customer service is pretty bad.
if you want to avoid it in the future, you might prefer the surface duo, it's not seamless, but it's a better design.