Waterproof iPhone 5 Wackiness
Posted by Michael Nace on Wednesday Jan 18, 2012 Under Apple Rumors, iPhone 5 OpinionA new coating technology — tested on an iPhone — purports to seal a smartphone so well that it can go swimming. But how did this publicity stunt become a viable rumor for the iPhone 5?
Over the course of time that I’ve written on this blog, I’ve heard numerous commenters make their share of witty comments about zany rumors. Usually it goes like this: “Yeah, and the next iPhone will do my laundry,” or “Yeah, and the next iPhone will give psychiatric advice.” (Actually, with the evolution of Siri, you never know).
When I saw a rash of new rumors of a waterproof iPhone 5 pop up, it reminded me of the (much wittier) above-mentioned quips from the much saner readers and commenters of this blog, and how the rest of the iPhone 5 rumor mill didn’t seem to get the joke. In case you missed it, here are a collection of headlines from syndicated tech sites: “Galaxy S4 and iPhone 5 To Be Waterproof?” (Mobile Magazine), “iPhone 5 Will be Waterproof?” (International Business Times), “Samsung and Apple looking at new waterproof smartphone tech” (Pocket-Lint). That last one has enjoyed the “highly cited” tag on Google News.
In case you missed it, there’s this video — a publicity stunt by Zagg (and a very effective one at that) — to promote a new kind of synthetic coating that can virtually seal an iPhone’s internal hardware to the point where it can keep water from getting inside the chassis. The video managed to spur a viral media movement (as in bowel movement — or maybe bowl movement is more like it, but more on that in a second) that let to this flurry of articles.
Let’s get the synopsis right from the horse’s mouth — The Daily Mail – who says the following: “The new ‘nanotech’ spray coating is applied to the circuitry inside phones and lets you dunk phones entirely underwater, and still takes calls.” The Mail gives this rumor the “real newspaper” treatment, citing completely unfounded claims like “Up to a million phones are water-damaged every year worldwide,” and “Fifty-two per cent of UK smartphone users who have water-damaged their phones admit to having done so by dropping them down the toilet.”
Really? “Up to a million?” So, that could be a million smartphones, or, like, seven.
And regarding the other statistic — that “Fifty-two per cent of UK smartphone users who have water-damaged their phones admit to having done so by dropping them down the toilet” — seems like it’s in the wrong article. Shouldn’t that be included in the whole U.K. Public Drinking Problem Issue article set?
All kidding aside, I don’t doubt that dropping your smartphone in the toilet or having it otherwise ruined by water is a real drag. And if smartphone manufacturers like Apple and Samsung could fortify their products’ ability to withstand and repel moisture, no one would argue that it would be a bad thing. But to imagine that these two smartphone giants are necessarily going to make a waterproof iPhone 5 or Android phone a major focal point in 2012 is crazy. The fact is, the source of these reports is the video itself, which in its own right is impressive: to see an iPhone get dunked in water and continue to function is a sight to behold, and precisely the kind of thing that makes geeks really excited (excited enough to imagine that this will be a pressing feature for the iPhone 5). But it does not constitute a reliable source.
I for one would not put a lot of stock into this report as a viable rumor for the iPhone 5. First, as you can probably read parenthetically from my sarcasm and mirth surrounding the whole toilet thing, I don’t think that Tim Cook loses sleep at night at the “up to a million” people worldwide who drop their smartphone in the potty. In fact, Mr. Cook, knowing how committed iPhone users are to their phones, is probably lobbying the toilet industry to widen the bowl diameters in order to increase submerged iPhones, leading to secondary purchases.
Second, it remains to be seen how practical this new technology is. Assuming that the iPhone 5 will continue to not give access to the battery as others have not, it is by definition a good candidate for such a sealant. But the sealant apparently coats the actual interior components — not the chassis itself. So, while after spending six minutes in your bathtub, your iPhone 5 will still work just fine, but you’ll hear water sloshing around in the chassis for the next six months.
And what about the cost? Would it be worth adding production costs to the iPhone 5 for this sort of sealant? How about just not putting your iPhone 5 near water sources?
By Michael Nace
Michael Nace is the Publisher of the iPhone 5 News Blog and iPhone 6 News Blog. He has published articles about the iPhone since 2010.
Keep Reading:
January 18th, 2012 at 10:23 pm
Even though a waterproof phone is cool, I wouldn’t buy a phone just because it’s waterproof. Btw 2 of my phones died by falling into the toilet so they have their sources right. Lol
Like?
1 
0
January 18th, 2012 at 11:57 pm
Yeah, my comment sparked an article
Like?
1 
1
January 19th, 2012 at 5:13 am
“How about just not putting your iPhone 5 near water sources?”
You could just as easily solve the road traffic deaths issue by saying:
“How about all drivers stop drinking and pay more attention when driving?”
Done… Next problem to solve?
Seriously though, making phones more tolerant to water contact (maybe not waterproof, but water resistant) would be a good idea and positive selling point for a significant portion of the market.
Like?
2 
0
January 19th, 2012 at 6:32 am
This sounds like a great idea to me. It means that I could use a regular iPhone car holder and do away with the bulky waterproof case I have to use at the moment, as on my boat I use my iPhone for the GPS system. There are a lot more practical uses than just protecting your phone from falling in a toilet or fish tank.
BTW, as a UK citizen, I have never dropped a phone in a toilet, though I have heard plenty of stories of people that do, and alcohol is usually involved
Like?
1 
0
January 19th, 2012 at 6:57 am
There is a substance called Aerogel which is the lightest solid known to man. It also has the ability to repel fluid and protect against other harsh elements such as fire. I don’t know if this is something which can be used to coat circuitry or indeed a whole phone chassis but it is an interesting material!
I’m off to binge drink now.
Like?
1 
1
January 19th, 2012 at 9:39 am
I doubt on any type of waterproofing. Electronics these days are built to be disposable. Wears out, buy a new one. Break it, buy a new one. etc.
The non-user replaceable iPhone battery is good for about 2 years. I wonder why….
Like?
1 
0
January 19th, 2012 at 10:20 am
This article simultaneously made me want to upgrade my porcelain throne and tinkle..but I think i’ll do the latter before the former.
Like?
0 
0
January 19th, 2012 at 10:35 am
The only problem would be heat……….That’s why this isn’t going to happen soon.
Like?
1 
0
January 19th, 2012 at 5:20 pm
I’d rather have a 100% “shatter-proof” phone over waterproof.
Like?
3 
0
January 19th, 2012 at 6:37 pm
So who did this first, Zagg or Liquipel? I say the Liquipel demo way before the Zagg demo.
Like?
0 
0
January 19th, 2012 at 7:07 pm
The droid razr is ‘splash proof’ but it cant be dunked it water like that
Like?
0 
0
January 19th, 2012 at 7:15 pm
Also i have had 2 phones, 2 pairs of headphones, and one USB drive go in the washing machine and dryer so if apple could make this water proof and heat proof that would be better
Like?
0 
0
January 20th, 2012 at 6:30 am
I think Damo hit the nail on the head; they’re going to have to test coated circuitboards and battery connections throughly under high heat situations.
In all it sounds like a novel idea; coat the components that are succeptible instead of trying to turn the device into the space shuttle and seal everything out. One small gap or weakened port cover and the entire protection is lost in the current method.
I do agree, though, that since the public isn’t really complaining or demanding this type of feature in a new smartphone, there isn’t much motivation on Apple’s part to move on this, especially when it will increase production costs while reducing secondary replacement sales. The current public understanding is that if you drop your smartphone into water and stops functioning, it’s on you because of your actions, NOT because the manufacturer made an inferior product. Until that changes I don’t think we’ll see much movement on this.
Besides, Apple can just dazzle us (and in this case, distract us) with other new hardware and software innovations that will keep our attention away from this kind of addition.
Boy I hope I’m wrong; I would love to have this inside my next iPhone.
Like?
0 
0
January 20th, 2012 at 12:10 pm
Maybe Apple should provide disinfection spray for UK iPhones!
Like?
0 
0
January 20th, 2012 at 12:26 pm
Oh and I also had a phone that went into the washer and dryer and it survived lol (a Motorola Krazr btw)
Like?
0 
0
January 20th, 2012 at 6:24 pm
I figured you had a quirky anecdote to go along with this story, Christian.
Like?
0 
0
January 22nd, 2012 at 9:03 pm
Wow good for iPhone 5, sony is already doing it by the way, check out the sony xperia active its submersible and is shock proof.
Like?
0 
0
March 13th, 2012 at 10:47 pm
For those of you that have an older model (iPhone4 for example) there is a product that can do the sae thing for you. Liquipel offers the coating for a reasonable price. Check it out here http://tracking.liquipel.com/SH5g.
Like?
0 
0
April 24th, 2013 at 6:38 am
Hey there. I ran across your web site the employment of windows live messenger. It is deemed an extremely smartly prepared article. I am going to make sure you take a note of it as well as go back to continue reading of your handy data. Basically article. I’ll surely gain.
Like?
0 
0