Sorry to say this, fellows, but I don’t trust your Samsung Galaxy Fold tests

The Galaxy Fold flaunts a brand new form factor, and as far as the exterior pattern goes, this is the first device of its kind to enter uncharted territories. The biggest question surrounding Samsung's first foldable phone is simply how durable information technology is, and to this end, our dominate Danny took the device to Egypt for a existent-globe test in a sandy environment. To our surprise, the phone survived unscathed.

Meanwhile, various contained websites took information technology upon themselves to examination the durability of the intricate swivel and foldable panel in lab-like atmospheric condition using a robotic contraption that repeatedly folds and unfolds the device. Merely equally much equally I appreciate the effort of trying to determine the Fold's immovability, I must say that I don't trust these independent Galaxy Fold tests whatever.

Don't get me wrong, I'chiliad not trying to imply that the websites and/or reviewers who have performed these Galaxy Fold tests are not to be trusted. All I'thousand proverb is that the exam they've devised seems to be flawed and very unrepresentative of existent-world usage. The biggest issue I have is that they try to cram 100,000+ folds in equally petty fourth dimension as possible, and they don't seem to take into consideration the damage that can occur from rut generated by friction.

No consideration for frictional heating in these independent tests

Because of this, the fold/unfold tests I've seen so far seem to defeat their own purpose. They aim to quickly determine how the swivel and/or the foldable console volition fare afterwards years of usage, just the only thing they seem to reveal is how well the Galaxy Fold fares after a few hours of abuse.

You may recall that Samsung tested the Galaxy Fold's mechanical hinge using its ain robotic contraptions, but take a closer look at the official video below and you lot will see that Samsung'southward test doesn't put unnecessary (or unrealistic) strain on the moving parts. There's always a suspension betwixt each fold/unfold, and I assume this has less to do with Samsung wanting to smooth a bright light on its product, and more than to do with wanting to avoid frictional heating during testing – a miracle y'all would not have to worry nigh at all during normal usage, therefore, something that should not be a part of the testing procedure.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McdgS3Popjk

In dissimilarity, the independent Milky way Fold tests we've seen so far don't seem to account for frictional heating at all. They near instantly fold and unfold the telephone for more than than 100,000 times over and over (almost slamming it open and shut), without letting the hinge mechanism and foldable display take a breather for fifty-fifty a second. I must say I have real issues with this methodology. I think information technology simply does not reveal what volition happen to the Galaxy Fold after 100,000 folds/unfolds in the existent world. It only shows what frictional heating can practice to the hinge (and possibly even the foldable panel) over hours of abuse. Take a look for yourself.

Aren't driblet tests but every bit useless?

Non really. To be frank, I'm non a fan of driblet tests either, and I will never decide whether or not a telephone is worth buying based on drop test results. And indeed, drop tests are as well often controlled and somewhat unrealistic, as they usually aim to drop devices on their almost vulnerable sides and highlight what could happen in the worst-case scenario.

Nonetheless, drop tests are at least more consequent with real-world usage scenarios. Dropping your telephone face-down on hard concrete is something that could actually happen. But you will never fold/unfold your Galaxy Fold for 100,000+ times without taking a break, and in my stance, these independent tests fail to accurately "age" the device and offer a glimpse of the future.

In closing, understand that I'm not blindly defending the Milky way Fold. I am well aware of the telephone'south shortcomings and the warnings that come with it. I know it's not equally resilient as a regularly-shaped flagship, especially since it lacks grit and waterproofing, and then I would be happy to see how the device will actually concur up over the years. But the independent fold/unfold tests I've seen then far don't satisfy my curiosity or answer my question. They seem unfair, inaccurate, or misleading.

If you truly want to requite people useful information well-nigh a fresh device that boasts a new and untested course gene, so you'd better melody (and tone down) your robotic contraption while taking into consideration whatever unintended effects that may occur and most negate your own examination results.

Image of Galaxy Fold

SamsungGalaxy Fold

BuyFull SpecsReview