Almost everyone has encountered the unthinkable: his smartphone landed in the toilet. Or you forgot to take off your smartwatch before throwing yourself into the pool. Or maybe you wanted to get those headphones out of your pocket before washing clothes. And now what?
Internet forums are full of tips to dry that soaked device, but the problematic myths on the protection and repair of liquids make consumers separate the reality of fiction.
I am a researcher who studies how technologies play a role in people’s daily practices and experiences. My new book, “License to Spill: where Dry Devices Meet Liquid Lives,” explores the border between the wet and dry in the way people perceive and treat their electronic devices.
Here are five common myths about wetting the devices:
Myth 1: My device turned on again! Alright
While it is a relief to see how your technology arises from among the dead, what you cannot see are subtle processes that occur inside, such as corrosion. The breakage of the metal parts of your device due to moisture usually occurs over time, in a period that can take place days, weeks or months after the offensive incident.
That is why even moisture of wet climates or steaming shower can have a long -term impact, although everything started immediately after a dip or immersion.
Myth 2: My “Water Resistant” device can tolerate any type of humidity
The term “water resistant” is controversial, so controversial, in fact that the Federal Commerce Commission (FTC) has strict rules about the use of the term in advertising, once even prohibiting that it would be sold in the advertising texts of the bracelet watches.
Given the vagueness of the term, it is better to examine different standards of water resistance, such as the protection against entry, or IP entry, classifications and Mil-Spec, or ISO in the case of watches, and read the small print about what these standards really cover.
Myth 3: My device has an excellent IP classification, so it has been tested under real conditions
Companies often announce IP classifications as a way of attracting consumers to buy their products, but it is important to know that these classifications are based on contact with fresh water. If you are worried about the foam of the jacuzzi or that can of dump beer, there is no guarantee that a manufacturer has tried its device in these situations, often sticky, and an IP classification will not take them into account.
You may be interested: They ratify that annual vaccines against COVID-19 are no longer recommended for children or pregnant women
Myth 4: I have some rice in the kitchen. I can fix this myself!
It is natural to panic and look for the fastest domestic solution when a spill occurs or an immersion, and a cup of rice remains a commonly sought option.
However, rice trick does not work very well and rice particles can enter the device and cause even more damage. In addition to taking your device to a professional reparator, it is better to immediately turn off your product, remove the battery and plug if you can, and let all components dry for one or two days.
Myth 5: Well, this device is broken, but I have a guarantee to replace it
While taking your product from your aqueous tomb, you may find relief in the fact that you come with a guarantee. Not so fast.
Most traditional limited guarantees of consumer technology do not cover liquid damage. These days, usually, you need to buy an additional guarantee, often called accidental damage due to handling. However, be careful: even those policies can limit the amount of “incidents” or “moisture events” that are allowed per year.
Keeping it realistic
The characteristics of water resistance on devices such as laptops, tablets, smartphones and smart watches have recently improved, but the deck is still often against consumers who must see the exaggeration of advertising statements, disconcert classification systems and penalty policies.
That is why it is essential that manufacturers think carefully and ethically about how their products are designed, market and repair. In terms of design, water resistance is no longer a niche characteristic for industrial workers or outdoor adventurers. While it is not realistic to expect a device that is designed to resist all dangers, it is also not reasonable to ask consumers to walk on tiptoe for products that provide access to critical resources and social support.
It is important that manufacturers avoid promising consumers the moon. Samsung Australia, for example, paid 14 million Australian dollars in fines for exaggerating the protection of their phones for swimming. It is certainly fun to see commercials with Lil Wayne spraying a smartphone with champagne or seeing it immerse it in a fishbowl, but if manufacturers advise these practices, then they should not idealize them.
Of course, it is probably common sense that your phone should not bathe in champagne. However, life is constantly around and with our devices, from shower and kitchen to the gym and beach. This means that fairer policies around repair, such as those promoted by the movement of the right to repair, and guarantees should stop treating consumers as if they were “bad” users.
After all, each one of us is just a splash to cry on spilled milk.
*Rachel Plotnick is an associate professor of film and media studies at the University of Indiana.
This article was originally published in The Conversation/Reuters
