• REDACTED@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Foldable fatigue. I forgot the technical term. Every foldable is tested for how many times it can fold before fatigue starts setting in, resulting in micro cracks/tears and eventually broken screen. I have no clue about flip, but I think the latest fold was rated at 500k folds and mine is rated at 1m folds, but it still sounds like the weak part to me.

    • Overspark@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      It’ll die eventually, sure. But the numbers you quote are ridiculously high, it’ll take several decades to get there. So that seems like a non-issue to me.

      • REDACTED@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I know, but each time you go to a foldable subreddit, you can almost certainly find people showing their broken screens. The numbers are just for folding in perfect conditions. It is the weak part, still. No hard glass cover, hardly water resistant, weak dust resistance, etc. I accidentally once folded my screen with a key inside (as I was folding at the same time as sliding into the pocket that had a key in it) and only noticed few minutes later. Survived, but that would not be a worry at all with non-foldable.

        • Overspark@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Sure, but there are tons of people walking around with cracked screens on slab phones too. The screen is always the weakest part. What would be noticeable is if screens on foldables failed way more than on slab phones, but I haven’t seen any evidence to support that. I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s the other way around: slabs break their screens far more when they get dropped because the screen isn’t protected on the inside like a foldable does.