Related
I just stumbled upon this:
http://www.irevivespray.com/
Supposedly it can bring water damaged devices back to life. They claim it removes the corrosion and hence any shorts that may have been caused. Looks like a total scam to me, but I was wondering if anyone has this or has any experience with similar products.
Also it would be great of one of the hardware savvy guys could comment on whether it's possible to "repair" water damaged devices at all. My (basic) understanding is that the electrical components in the phone/tablet etc. can be permanently damaged by exposure to water and all the minerals typically found in water. Moreover, even if they survive the initial submersion, there's no guarantee that they will not slowly corrode and fail in the future.
Here in Germany all official repair companies refuse to repair water damaged devices, because they are required by law to a guarantee for their work and they claim it's impossible to guarantee that a water damaged component will continue to function even after being properly cleaned.
Any comments?
Have to admit it does sound a bit dodgy, although I use something that may be similar on bearings - Skanunu Bearing Cleaner is good for cleaning rusted bearings (and I mean so rusted they didn't move), although I'm not sure I'd want to put anything like that on electronics. I can't seem to find any chemical info on it...
Iamnotacrook said:
Have to admit it does sound a bit dodgy, although I use something that may be similar on bearings - Skanunu Bearing Cleaner is good for cleaning rusted bearings (and I mean so rusted they didn't move), although I'm not sure I'd want to put anything like that on electronics. I can't seem to find any chemical info on it...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I suspect it's just branded 99% alcohol Still I am curious whether simply cleaning the salts and minerals left by the water can possibly "repair" a device.
Water damaged phones can be repairable depending on the level of submersion and whether the owner is enthusiastic with the power button or not. If I try to repair a water damaged phone I do a full stripdown and clean aggressively with a brush and pure alcohol. It can work sometimes but quite often water damage is terminal. I've had plenty of people phone me and say they dropped their phone in water so I say 'bring it to me and definitely don't turn it on' then they phone me back later and say 'i turned it on and it's ok now so don't worry' but it may work short term but water destroys electronic components very fast.
This spray, as el_commandante said is probably branded alcohol and while it may work in extracting water, it will not clean properly without any agitation.
Sent from my 1.8ghz Xperia Play!
BensJammin said:
Water damaged phones can be repairable depending on the level of submersion and whether the owner is enthusiastic with the power button or not. If I try to repair a water damaged phone I do a full stripdown and clean aggressively with a brush and pure alcohol. It can work sometimes but quite often water damage is terminal. I've had plenty of people phone me and say they dropped their phone in water so I say 'bring it to me and definitely don't turn it on' then they phone me back later and say 'i turned it on and it's ok now so don't worry' but it may work short term but water destroys electronic components very fast.
This spray, as el_commandante said is probably branded alcohol and while it may work in extracting water, it will not clean properly without any agitation.
Sent from my 1.8ghz Xperia Play!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If by agitation you mean cleaning the inside of the phone with a brush, they do say you should do that. In fact they have videos on YouTube in which they show you how to do that Still, it feels a little scammy to claim a $30 bottle of alcohol will fix your water damaged phone in 90% of the cases They even offer money back guarantee, which is pretty bold.
It seems to me that if you drop a working phone in water and the water finds its way to its internals and shorts one of the components it doesn't really matter how well you clean it Then again there are plenty of info online about devices that have successfully survived encounters with water so the policy of the manufacturers is indeed a little questionable...
el_commandante said:
If by agitation you mean cleaning the inside of the phone with a brush, they do say you should do that. In fact they have videos on YouTube in which they show you how to do that Still, it feels a little scammy to claim a $30 bottle of alcohol will fix your water damaged phone in 90% of the cases They even offer money back guarantee, which is pretty bold.
It seems to me that if you drop a working phone in water and the water finds its way to its internals and shorts one of the components it doesn't really matter how well you clean it Then again there are plenty of info online about devices that have successfully survived encounters with water so the policy of the manufacturers is indeed a little questionable...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For the most part you are right. I do phone repairs as a side business but I will rarely touch a water damaged one. Phones can be repaired provided no damage was done when it shorted, and providing no power is applied until it is totally dried 100%. I use a brush to agitate the board with alcohol and this removes and conductive materials on the board (which could even just be damp dust). I have rescued a couple, but for the most part I leave them alone. I would be very dubious about this spray though. I'm sure there's some small print regarding the money back guarantee!
Sent from my 1.8ghz Xperia Play!
I've repaired many Android, & non-Android phones, & I can tell you this... Water damage is completely random, & completely various. Many times, it is not as terrifying as everyone makes it out to be. There was a point in time when I was actually hunting for water damaged phones to repair.
As I said, it's completely random, & is determined on a case by case basis. The damage will not always be the same. Maybe the speaker will blow out... replace the speaker. The hardware buttons are malfunctioning now... replace the ribbon cable for the buttons. Many times, people say the phone died & won't turn on anymore, when really, the LCD screen blew out... replace the screen, problem solved. Many times, the main ribbon cable is not good, causing the device to not turn on, or other multiple problems... replace the ribbon cable. Sometimes, it can be a headache though, because many different components will all blow out at that time, or, you'll fix some, & others will go or malfunction soon after.
As far as the cpu itself, from what I've seen, these things are BGA components. They are soldered on with a BGA interface. Not only that, they are also plastered down with a ridiculously strong super glue adhesive as well. They are completely airtight. NO water will EVER get underneath there.
Yes, it is always very important to clean everything off with pure alcohol & a q-tip. Alcohol is best for cleaning off electronic components, & it evaporates very fast too. About that spray you've posted, I didn't even look at it, but I've seen plenty of those same type of marketing schemes for a long time. Basically, it's just alcohol they pour into a bottle with their fancy looking label, & sell it to you for a ridiculously high price, claiming that it's magic. A page right out of apple's book, in my opinion.
3ndymion218 said:
A page right out of apple's book, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha, absolutely! But as we all know, there are plenty of suckers in the world
Thank you for your detailed explanation. The bigger question for me at least is whether you could really be sure that a phone has been repaired once water has entered inside. It sounds like there's some merit to the claim that once water enters the device, you can never be sure that some components will not fail in the near future. Now the next question is how hard it actually is to water proof the key components inside. It seems to me that it's relatively trivial to do a relatively good job water proof most of the phone to a good degree...
Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk 2
el_commandante said:
Haha, absolutely! But as we all know, there are plenty of suckers in the world
Thank you for your detailed explanation. The bigger question for me at least is whether you could really be sure that a phone has been repaired once water has entered inside. It sounds like there's some merit to the claim that once water enters the device, you can never be sure that some components will not fail in the near future. Now the next question is how hard it actually is to water proof the key components inside. It seems to me that it's relatively trivial to do a relatively good job water proof most of the phone to a good degree...
Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From what I've seen, it is true that there could always be headaches down the line with some components starting to give out, but I've never seen the most important things take any damage. Those being the cpu & other memory chips. The cpu is really plastered on there, & I think the other important chips too. It's usually only components that take damage, such as buttons & the main ribbon cable.
Then again, most of my experience is with various HTC devices, which relied more & more on ribbon cables the newer they got. I believe some manufactures still use a big board with everything on it. I don't know how bad those would take to water damage, or if they have main ribbon cables that can be replaced. As far as water proofing a phone, I don't think it's really possible without some kind of exterior, water proof case. The housings have way too many opportunities for water to pour right in.
3ndymion218 said:
From what I've seen, it is true that there could always be headaches down the line with some components starting to give out, but I've never seen the most important things take any damage. Those being the cpu & other memory chips. The cpu is really plastered on there, & I think the other important chips too. It's usually only components that take damage, such as buttons & the main ribbon cable.
Then again, most of my experience is with various HTC devices, which relied more & more on ribbon cables the newer they got. I believe some manufactures still use a big board with everything on it. I don't know how bad those would take to water damage, or if they have main ribbon cables that can be replaced. As far as water proofing a phone, I don't think it's really possible without some kind of exterior, water proof case. The housings have way too many opportunities for water to pour right in.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem I have found is that if you get it working again easy enough, your customer comes back saying there's something wrong with it again in a week or so. Most of my experience is with iPhones and although a lot can be repaired, there's usually more that needs replacing, headphone jacks, mics etc and it gets expensive which is why I avoid water damage repairs now.
There's always Liquipel though. The sooner manufacturers start investing in this the better!!
Sent from my 1.8ghz Xperia Play!
el_commandante said:
I just stumbled upon this:
Supposedly it can bring water damaged devices back to life. They claim it removes the corrosion and hence any shorts that may have been caused. Looks like a total scam to me, but I was wondering if anyone has this or has any experience with similar products.
Also it would be great of one of the hardware savvy guys could comment on whether it's possible to "repair" water damaged devices at all. My (basic) understanding is that the electrical components in the phone/tablet etc. can be permanently damaged by exposure to water and all the minerals typically found in water. Moreover, even if they survive the initial submersion, there's no guarantee that they will not slowly corrode and fail in the future.
Here in Germany all official repair companies refuse to repair water damaged devices, because they are required by law to a guarantee for their work and they claim it's impossible to guarantee that a water damaged component will continue to function even after being properly cleaned.
Any comments?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would like to get my hands on this
BensJammin said:
The problem I have found is that if you get it working again easy enough, your customer comes back saying there's something wrong with it again in a week or so. Most of my experience is with iPhones and although a lot can be repaired, there's usually more that needs replacing, headphone jacks, mics etc and it gets expensive which is why I avoid water damage repairs now.
There's always Liquipel though. The sooner manufacturers start investing in this the better!!
Sent from my 1.8ghz Xperia Play!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, that is true. The headaches will come from people, & not so much from the device itself. If it's your phone, no problem. You can always replace whatever else starts to go. But when you're fixing things for other people, whether it be phones, or cars, or whatever, it's ALWAYS your fault. Once you touch it, anything that happens is blamed on you. It gets really annoying after a while.
Didn't some of the motorola tablets use Liquipel?
Hobbzey said:
Didn't some of the motorola tablets use Liquipel?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not sure but I'm surprised more companies haven't jumped on the waterproof bandwagon. I would love a waterproof tablet as I read magazines in the bath and most publications are going digital now due to costs and there will definitely be a need for waterproofing. Although capacitive touch screens can react awkwardly when they're wet though.
The Sony xperia z is totally waterproof already so the technology to do this is already there. Just not sure if I trust it.
Sent from my 1.8ghz Xperia Play!
BensJammin said:
Not sure but I'm surprised more companies haven't jumped on the waterproof bandwagon. I would love a waterproof tablet as I read magazines in the bath and most publications are going digital now due to costs and there will definitely be a need for waterproofing. Although capacitive touch screens can react awkwardly when they're wet though.
The Sony xperia z is totally waterproof already so the technology to do this is already there. Just not sure if I trust it.
Sent from my 1.8ghz Xperia Play!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think it's so much having to do with technology, but more in how they design the casing. Other things, like watches, use o-rings to seal the casing & make it waterproof. I wonder how Sony did it??? I especially wonder what they did about the speaker & mic openings. I'd really like to see that phone opened up. Yes, it would be nice if other companies joined in too. They probably don't want to spend the money researching how to make their cases watertight.
it sounds too good to be true
3ndymion218 said:
I don't think it's so much having to do with technology, but more in how they design the casing. Other things, like watches, use o-rings to seal the casing & make it waterproof. I wonder how Sony did it??? I especially wonder what they did about the speaker & mic openings. I'd really like to see that phone opened up. Yes, it would be nice if other companies joined in too. They probably don't want to spend the money researching how to make their cases watertight.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
On the mass scale that these companies sell their phones I wouldn't think it would cost them too much in the long run to invest in liquipel. That protects the mics, speakers and even jacks. I'm sure someone I know will smash their xperia z soon so I look forward to ripping that apart
Sent from my 1.8ghz Xperia Play!
BensJammin said:
On the mass scale that these companies sell their phones I wouldn't think it would cost them too much in the long run to invest in liquipel. That protects the mics, speakers and even jacks. I'm sure someone I know will smash their xperia z soon so I look forward to ripping that apart
Sent from my 1.8ghz Xperia Play!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think it was the Motorola Xyboard's that used it...?
Hobbzey said:
Didn't some of the motorola tablets use Liquipel?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wish my xoom had it, my son dropped it in the bath tub, it got nearly no water in it worked for about a week more
then died completely. I'd almost be willing to try this if it really did work
I know there's a rust to primer stuff out there, but that's a bit simpler
---
I hate jelly beans, Google's jellybean is alright though.
Sent from my sickeningly sweet Galaxy Note II
I think it works,becoz all service centers will have this.
................................................................................................
This is a difficult post to write.
I fear Sony is going to ride the whirlwind regarding their advertising campaign in relation to this water resistant mobile.
How many of us have read posts and even professional reviews that refer to this mobile as "Water proof", Sony do NOT make this claim BUT the way they advertise the Z is going to cause problems for them in the very near future.
Such campaigns need to be aimed at Mr and Mrs average. By that I mean average customers who don't always think or really understand the true capabilities of this mobile. How many of you, the reader of this very article, have read the blurb that came with the Z? See what I mean?
The phone is designed to withstand what could be referred to as accidental contact with some water. The phone is certainly not, I repeat NOT water proof and the fact Sony shows the mobile being submerged in a glass of still water only make the general public see the phone as water proof. I am not going to bore you with the difference between water resistant and water proof. VERY few things man made are in fact water proof. My fear is some customers will be mislead into thinking they can use the phone while swimming or in a sauna, taking a shower when this is clearly not what Sony wanted to convey. There is a difference in placing the Z in a glass of still water for thirty minutes and placing it in a shower or even moving it around in a bath.
I can again but write the idea is that this phone is to a very small degree water resistant to accidental minor contact with water eg rain or steam in a bathroom, accidental contact should be the key here.
It will not be long before we hear of or read reports of customers being furious with Sony for not replacing their Z when the customer has taken it swimming with them! Already on this very forum there are posters who deliberately have taken their mobile into the shower or the bath to use? I have absolutely no idea why one would desire to do that but do understand human behaviour in trying or testing the phone out.
Sony should have been an awful lot more careful with their advertising. I think it perhaps wiser to have had a person answering the phone in the rain making it clear the phone is, to a given standard, water resistant, rather than immersing the phone deliberately into still water .
Remember still water at a depth of one metre is totally different in water pressure by moving an object through water at even half that depth.
Though I am enjoying the Sony experience I for one will not be 'testing' the mobile by deliberately submerging my phone in water, I see the water resistance characteristics as a plus against small water accidents, rain, and nothing more. To those who expect more PLEASE do study the small print regarding the standards used to asses the mobile and grade it as water resistant. You will be surprised just how non water proof the Z is.
Rather reminds me of the absurd scenarios we saw when Gorilla glass was introduced to mobiles . No end of Youtube clips by mentally challenged individuals dropping them on the floor, hitting them with hammers and even driving over them in cars? Gorilla glass made no such claims.
Must hastily add I am NOT criticising the Z, I like the mobile, I am suggesting Sony may have mistakenly mislead the consumer into thinking the mobile is something it is not. Their error but the consumer may well pay the price?
I hope you are enjoying the Z as much as I am.
Kind regards.
I don't think it will be their fault. They state very clearly in their documents, webpage and their product brochures that the Xperia Z is IP55/57, which even a cursory Google search will show that it will either withstand, water-wise:
IPX5 - Water jets
Water projected by a nozzle (6.3 mm) against enclosure from any direction shall have no harmful effects.
Test duration: at least 3 minutes
Water volume: 12.5 litres per minute
Pressure: 30 kPa at distance of 3 m
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
or
IPX7 - Immersion up to 1 m
Ingress of water in harmful quantity shall not be possible when the enclosure is immersed in water under defined conditions of pressure and time (up to 1 m of submersion).
Test duration: 30 minutes
Immersion at depth of at least 1 m measured at bottom of device, and at least 15 cm measured at top of device
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you're mistaken over what the water resistance means. First, I don't really see how the classifications above are warranted as "accidental contact", given the test durations. You can drop your phone in the toilet bowl and it will be perfectly fine, water-wise. Using it in a shower or bath will not cause any problems either, since it conforms to IPX5/7. Immersing your phone deliberately into still water is perfectly fine, as per IPX7. I don't think any reasonable consumer will buy the device without even wondering what IP55/57 is, yet you're wondering yourself without checking what IPX5/7 really means at all. Perhaps *you* should study what the water resistance means.
source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_Code, and http://www.ce-mag.com/archive/06/ARG/bisenius.htm
Sony advertised the Z with live models in a shower using the Z. Sony only warned against salty water. As long you close the ports and don't exceed the 30 mins, you'll be fine in the shower or the swimming pool.
Sent from my C6603 using xda premium
pandaball said:
I don't think it will be their fault. They state very clearly in their documents, webpage and their product brochures that the Xperia Z is IP55/57, which even a cursory Google search will show that it will either withstand, water-wise:
or
I think you're mistaken over what the water resistance means. First, I don't really see how the classifications above are warranted as "accidental contact", given the test durations. You can drop your phone in the toilet bowl and it will be perfectly fine, water-wise. Using it in a shower or bath will not cause any problems either, since it conforms to IPX5/7. Immersing your phone deliberately into still water is perfectly fine, as per IPX7. I don't think any reasonable consumer will buy the device without even wondering what IP55/57 is, yet you're wondering yourself without checking what IPX5/7 really means at all. Perhaps *you* should study what the water resistance means.
source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_Code, and http://www.ce-mag.com/archive/06/ARG/bisenius.htm
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi,
Thanks for the reply.
I am well aware of what constitutes water resistance and the codification system used by Sony on this occasion. My post was one aimed at prevention and not to criticise the reader or the Xperia Z.
As you can see the post below yours is by a member here who mentions it is fine to swim with this mobile? I am not going to bore you with the dangers of taking this phone swimming, I merely wished to help and support, perhaps even prevent, some owners from causing themselves difficulties.
I am pleased you have read the small print and studied the mobiles realistic water resistance policy. Perhaps this small debate may encourage others to do the same.:good:
Again many thanks for the reply,
Kind regards.
How about go and acro S? Are they water proof, or also water resistant?
Ryland Johnson said:
As you can see the post below yours is by a member here who mentions it is fine to swim with this mobile?.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hope you don't take my post as rude or anything - and it is not directed to you.
Sony provides all the specification you need. There's even a cossed-out picture of a swimming man with a phone in his hand on the first page of instructions manual... they clearly say what the phone will resist and what it won't resist. What you can do with it, or where you can take it. Basically, if you open your manual it says:
It CAN be submerged to 1m for 30 minutes
It WILL survive low pressure splashes of water
NO salt water, sea water etc as it might damage the covers
Covers MUST be closed firmly for anything above to apply
What's more to ask ? It basically covers it all...
And no, it's not resistant to "accidental" contact with water. You can actually submerge the phone, take a shower with it ( done it few times ) or leave it in the aquarium for 30 minutes. As long as you closed the covers, didn't exceed 30 minutes or 1 meter requirement, and didn't splash it with high-pressure - your phone will not die, that's what IP certificate guarantees. You can't swim with it in the pool because of the chlorine - as Sony clearly said, salt or any chemicals in the water might break the rubber seals.
What i'm trying to say is: if somebody is too lazy to take a look at the manual, read the IP specifications etc. I don't think Sony should actually care about that. You can't "baby-proof" everything. Read, learn, understand - don't "just assume".
Good thread though, if it'll make people read and learn - i'm all thumbs up
Akiainavas said:
I hope you don't take my post as rude or anything - and it is not directed to you.
Sony provides all the specification you need. There's even a cossed-out picture of a swimming man with a phone in his hand on the first page of instructions manual... they clearly say what the phone will resist and what it won't resist. What you can do with it, or where you can take it. Basically, if you open your manual it says:
It CAN be submerged to 1m for 30 minutes
It WILL survive low pressure splashes of water
NO salt water, sea water etc as it might damage the covers
Covers MUST be closed firmly for anything above to apply
What's more to ask ? It basically covers it all...
And no, it's not resistant to "accidental" contact with water. You can actually submerge the phone, take a shower with it ( done it few times ) or leave it in the aquarium for 30 minutes. As long as you closed the covers, didn't exceed 30 minutes or 1 meter requirement, and didn't splash it with high-pressure - your phone will not die, that's what IP certificate guarantees. You can't swim with it in the pool because of the chlorine - as Sony clearly said, salt or any chemicals in the water might break the rubber seals.
What i'm trying to say is: if somebody is too lazy to take a look at the manual, read the IP specifications etc. I don't think Sony should actually care about that. You can't "baby-proof" everything. Read, learn, understand - don't "just assume".
Good thread though, if it'll make people read and learn - i'm all thumbs up
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi,
Thanks for the reply. We are indeed on the same page.
I really don't want my initial post to be taken out of context. I am not criticising the Z, I own one. I am suggesting Sony may well have shot themselves in the foot regarding their publicity. Not every purchaser of this mobile will understand the intention of Sony manufacturing a water resistant phone. I dislike them even using the term water resistant as it is such a highly subjective term.
Water proof is less subjective. Water proof means what it says water will not enter. I can't think of a man made device that is water proof. I am not saying they don't exist I am merely saying I don't know of any.
Back to water resistance. May I take a liberty and side track this thread? I mean no confrontation by doing so. Take a look at the following.
.................................................................................................................
"Watches are often classified by watch manufacturers by their degree of water resistance which, due to the absence of official classification standards, roughly translates to the following (1 metre ≈ 3.29 feet):[5]
Water resistance rating Suitability Remarks
Water Resistant 3 ATM or 30 m Suitable for everyday use. Splash/rain resistant. NOT suitable for showering, bathing, swimming, snorkelling, water related work and fishing. NOT suitable for diving.
Water Resistant 5 ATM or 50 m Suitable for swimming, white water rafting, non-snorkelling water related work, and fishing. NOT suitable for diving.
Water Resistant 10 ATM or 100 m Suitable for recreational surfing, swimming, snorkelling, sailing and water sports. NOT suitable for diving.
Water Resistant 20 ATM or 200 m Suitable for professional marine activity, serious surface water sports and skin diving. Suitable for skin diving.
Diver's 100 m Minimum ISO standard (ISO 6425) for scuba diving at depths NOT suitable for saturation diving. Diver's 100 m and 150 m watches are generally old(er) watches.
Diver's 200 m or 300 m Suitable for scuba diving at depths NOT suitable for saturation diving. Typical ratings for contemporary diver's watches.
Diver's 300+ m for mixed-gas diving Suitable for saturation diving (helium enriched environment). Watches designed for mixed-gas diving will have the DIVER’S WATCH L M FOR MIXED-GAS DIVING additional marking to point this out.
Manufacturers water resistance classifications are interpretations and are not part of any ISO standard definition."
.............................................................................................................................
In terms of a wrist watch this means a watch rated at 30M! is NOT suitable to even use in the shower? Take a look at the above attachment to see what an awful situation customers are in when we purchase a wrist watch. To me water resistant to 1ATM means just that, water will not enter said watch unless I take the watch below that depth...No no, not at all in terms of our wrist watches it means nothing of the sort. In fact a watch suitable for swimming has to have a rating of 50M that's over 160 feet! In real terms I have no idea how the watch industry gets away with their water resistant ratings. I will go further. Even within the industry different brands use different criteria!
Back to the Xperia Z. Still water has totally different properties to moving water. Pressure changes in accordance with not only depth but movement or flow of water across the device surfaces.
Now lets take the scenario of John Doe who thinks his Z is water proof and takes it swimming, water gets in, can you imagine the potential problems we would have as customers trying to convince the local Sony dealer we didn't take it sub aqua diving?
Now IF Sony had used a different advertising approach and shown a person using the Z in the rain or some such accidental situation we would have understood a lot better the phones realistic capabilities. The phone is not supposed to be used in water I suggest what Sony where trying to do was show this mobile can take an accidental spill or wet hands will not damage it nor perhaps the accidental dropping of it into the bath tub?
Hey. My objective has been achieved. I have started a debate and if that debate prevents a customer from making a genuine mistake I would be most satisfied. I wished I had known the watch criteria before I ruined a 10,000euro watch 20 years ago IN the shower!:crying:
I get you. Watches are a completely different thing - most of them are advertised as "water resistant" or "water proof" to XXATM - but there's always a small little detail - most of them are NOT IP certified.
IP "Ingress Protection" certificate states the device has been tested to resist water's ingress up to certified conditions ( which in case of XZ are 1m of depth, 30 minutes of duration and low pressure ). I had some water resistant watches as well - one of them died - but none of them had the IP certificate, all this ATM water resistance rubbish was just empty advertising used by the manufacturer
But where did you see Sony advertising Xperia Z for swimming ? I only remember them showing you can pour water onto it to clean the dust and use it in the rain.
There was a case of shower use advertisement, but remember that it was T-Mobile who organised that, not Sony. I really don't know if Sony has ever advertised or recommended the use of XZ on the pool/while swimming.
PS. Sorry about your watch
rudoska said:
How about go and acro S? Are they water proof, or also water resistant?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for the question.
I am afraid I can't give you an answer?:silly: I know there are certain industrial mobile phones that are rated with a water resistance of say 10M. They are not generally available to the public though. I also cant think to what end such a phone would be used? Certainly not for diving etc
I don't know of any such device that would claim to be "water proof". Water proof means water proof under all conditions and circumstances. Not even the most advanced deep sea search submersible make such a claim. A mobile phone? Why would one need such a mobile? I cant think how it would be useable nor functional.
I am not qualified to help you really with your valid question. Maybe another poster could give you a knowledge based qualified answer?
Kind regards.
Akiainavas said:
I get you. Watches are a completely different thing - most of them are advertised as "water resistant" or "water proof" to XXATM - but there's always a small little detail - most of them are NOT IP certified.
IP "Ingress Protection" certificate states the device has been tested to resist water's ingress up to certified conditions ( which in case of XZ are 1m of depth, 30 minutes of duration and low pressure ). I had some water resistant watches as well - one of them died - but none of them had the IP certificate, all this ATM water resistance rubbish was just empty advertising used by the manufacturer
But where did you see Sony advertising Xperia Z for swimming ? I only remember them showing you can pour water onto it to clean the dust and use it in the rain.
There was a case of shower use advertisement, but remember that it was T-Mobile who organised that, not Sony. I really don't know if Sony has ever advertised or recommended the use of XZ on the pool/while swimming.
PS. Sorry about your watch
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hiya,
Thank you for your commiserations regarding my watch. it was indeed a steep and expensive learning lesson-curve
I have NOT seen Sony advertise the use of the XZ for swimming. I have mentioned swimming in response to other posters comments only.
I have managed to write in one line what I am trying to convey. Sony has produced a mobile that is not adverse to accidental water contact but it is not an industrial phone specifically designed to come into contact with water? I guess domestic use V commercial use?
The adverts I have seen have been of the XZ sitting in a small bowl of water. With respect to us all I still think this will pass the wrong message to some users and that may prove expensive. I guess only time will tell.
Kind regards.
I don't think it passes the wrong message at all. Right from launch, the XZ has clearly been advertised and marketed as IP57 resistant - and in every review I recall seeing, IP57 has been clearly explained. I'm even fairly sure it was explained on the display case in the local Carphone Warehouse too.
You say you don't know any man made product that is waterproof. How about a submarine?
That's one of the main reasons this phone only has the IP57 rating - to acheive the next level of water resistance (IP58) it must be able to withstand 'long term immersion to a specified pressure'. I would imagine someone fairly high up at Sony decided that it wouldn't be worth the extra time and effort to pressure test it for 24 hours at 100m, for example.
I've seen lots of videos already of people using the XZ video camera under water while swimming, and it works perfectly.
No doubt someone with more money than sense will decide to see just how deep it can be taken, and for how long. It won't be me though. I'm quite happy knowing I can safely use it with wet hands and if it's dirty, wipe it clean in the washing up bowl!
parapaul said:
I don't think it passes the wrong message at all. Right from launch, the XZ has clearly been advertised and marketed as IP57 resistant - and in every review I recall seeing, IP57 has been clearly explained. I'm even fairly sure it was explained on the display case in the local Carphone Warehouse too.
You say you don't know any man made product that is waterproof. How about a submarine?
That's one of the main reasons this phone only has the IP57 rating - to acheive the next level of water resistance (IP58) it must be able to withstand 'long term immersion to a specified pressure'. I would imagine someone fairly high up at Sony decided that it wouldn't be worth the extra time and effort to pressure test it for 24 hours at 100m, for example.
I've seen lots of videos already of people using the XZ video camera under water while swimming, and it works perfectly.
No doubt someone with more money than sense will decide to see just how deep it can be taken, and for how long. It won't be me though. I'm quite happy knowing I can safely use it with wet hands and if it's dirty, wipe it clean in the washing up bowl!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your final paragraph describes my sentiments exactly.
Unfortunately your reference to submarines being "water proof" is incorrect. A submarine is water resistant to a given depth depending on the hull design etc. Take any known submarine past its water resistant depth and it WILL implode like an eggshell. This is a classic example of water proof verses water resistant. They are not one and the same.
My other point regarding your kind reply would be to mention that you, being of sound mind and body, understand and accept the limitations of the XZ. You are not going to test the glass with a lump hammer as shown on Youtube nor test to see just how far one could take the mobile under water until the inevitable occurred, you also understand the IP system of test measurements and codes. So many of the public will not even read the literature given with the phone. Unfortunately manufacturers simply have to explain in the simplest of languages exactly what a given device can and cannot do to protect their customers and themselves
Just one other point to mention. With regard water resistant it must also be understood that water temperature will also play a large part in the equation. The body of the XZ is not excluded from temperature change. Come to mention it there are so many variable and parameters when debating this its the main reason I started this post. With all the respect I have for Sony and admiration for the XZ I do think its campaign of advertising the XZ as water resistant may back fire on Sony. It will be interesting to read the various forums over the coming months just to see who does what to 'test' their phone. We can bet there will be some dandies!
Thanks for the reply,
My best to you and yours.
IP-55 and IP-57 are well described in the IP Code Breakdown. You can shower with it, submerge it in upto 1m of water for 30 minutes (perhaps more but that's not guaranteed) and it protects against dust ingress but is not dust tight. That's it and that's what Sony markets. People who do not read the manual on this deserve a dead phone to be absolutely honest with you.
Sent from my C6603 using xda premium
Even diving watches are water resistant not water proof
My watch clearly says WR200 so water resistant to 200 meters
So there will NEVER be a water proof phone!
The main thing is most water damage to phones is accidental. ie dropping it in the toilet. Taking it in the bathroom. Getting caught in the rain
For most people they can go about normal life and not worry about this type of accidental damage
Sent from my C6603 using xda premium
searley said:
Even diving watches are water resistant not water proof
My watch clearly says WR200 so water resistant to 200 meters
So there will NEVER be a water proof phone!
The main thing is most water damage to phones is accidental. ie dropping it in the toilet. Taking it in the bathroom. Getting caught in the rain
For most people they can go about normal life and not worry about this type of accidental damage
Sent from my C6603 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hiya,
I sincerely don't wish to upset you. If you read my post #7 you will see the watch you think can be taken to depths of 200m in fact cannot.
I know, don't tell me about it. Its a scandal and another one of those best kept secrets until you find your beloved watch has water inside it and the manufacturer tells you its your own fault. Don't set me off The watch you own is suitable for skin diving not sub aqua diving!
Back on topic, I agree entirely with your post. "For most people they can go about normal life and not worry about this type of accidental damage"
Bingo and Amen to that.
Regards.
Who gives a bloody crap. A glass is water proof unless you break it. This phone is water proof until it's not.
Why get hung up over nonsense. I've had my phone is all sorts of crap and it's still going and it's still water resistant or water proof so who gives a damn.
I'd risk the phone in the sea too as I very much doubt a quick dunk in sea water will do any damage to it but if it did who cares, I didn't follow the instructions in the manual which everyone can read.
Something is water proof until it's not. Resistant means it survives water getting in or resists it, proof means water doesn't get in or hurt it, at least in my eyes, it's the same blooming thing.
Close down this stupid thread.
biffsmash said:
Who gives a bloody crap. A glass is water proof unless you break it. This phone is water proof until it's not.
Why get hung up over nonsense. I've had my phone is all sorts of crap and it's still going and it's still water resistant or water proof so who gives a damn.
I'd risk the phone in the sea too as I very much doubt a quick dunk in sea water will do any damage to it but if it did who cares, I didn't follow the instructions in the manual which everyone can read.
Something is water proof until it's not. Resistant means it survives water getting in or resists it, proof means water doesn't get in or hurt it, at least in my eyes, it's the same blooming thing.
Close down this stupid thread.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You appear to be ending this thread with the same ignorance you began it. Congratulations to you Sir .:good: Your attitude speaks volumes...I am pleased to write that most people will respect their phone and DO care about it. If you look after your tools they will look after you. It is EXACTLY your gung-ho attitude that prompted me to write this short article in the first place.
Not that you care but as a BTW sea water will damage the mobile as will the chemicals used in a swimming pool.
Wise up and respect your phone. What truly peeves me with people like you is not only don't you deserve to own such a nice device BUT when you damage it you will shout the loudest from the roof tops what a crap mobile it is.....
If you dislike the thread avoid it. It was written with genuine concern for genuine owners and has produced some decent debate, that is what a forum is for.
Behave yourself :fingers-crossed:
I'm not afraid of it being water damaged, as if it happens I will just go back and buy a new one (with a different colour to mix it up:laugh.
I have tested it in the sink, submerged it several times, used it in the shower etc.
If it had failed very early on, I would maybe second-guess another purchase of the same phone again.
Make no mistake though, my 5 inch lump sleeps on feathers and does not get tossed around at all.
Not a dust particle nor scratch on it
People who have to open their pockets very wide to obtain one will most likely be a bit more cautious about water exposure.
The outright lazy ones who don't want to involve themselves and just thinks that everybody else should "take care of it" (you know the type)
are always the loudest crybaby.
biffsmash said:
Who gives a bloody crap. A glass is water proof unless you break it. This phone is water proof until it's not.
Why get hung up over nonsense. I've had my phone is all sorts of crap and it's still going and it's still water resistant or water proof so who gives a damn.
I'd risk the phone in the sea too as I very much doubt a quick dunk in sea water will do any damage to it but if it did who cares, I didn't follow the instructions in the manual which everyone can read.
Something is water proof until it's not. Resistant means it survives water getting in or resists it, proof means water doesn't get in or hurt it, at least in my eyes, it's the same blooming thing.
Close down this stupid thread.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I strongly suggest that you take your attitude down a few notches... This thread has more purpose and reason at being in the General area than about half of the other ones currently open. It is a discussion about the device's hardware.
As for the OP's post, his point, which I believe was widely missed by many people who have replied here, was that the way in which the phone is marketed to people will lead them to think that the phone is "indestructible" of sorts. The intent of this is not to raise the flag on Sony having advertised the phone as such, but rather to try and raise awareness on those who took the message in a way not intended and now think that they are holding a bullet proof 5 inch shield, which is impervious to everything. Don't believe me? Just look at this video (around time marker 5:23)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crgzS4F_nZA
The Sony employee himself throwing the device to the floor... did anyone mention the fact that the device has mechanical impact resistance level 0? (aka it does not protect against mechanical impacts).
I digress, the point of this thread (I think) is not to blame Sony per se or even to discuss the various parameters that revolve around water resistance. It is about being aware about the fact that taking the device for a swim is likely not a good idea and that the "rugged" features of the phone are for the "oh crap!" type of situations...
jm2c
Edit: To illustrate the above...
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2226481
Edit2: The chemical/salt water attacks are bad for the seals. Salt water is not magically going to permeate through the screen. The little rubber things in the caps will get corroded right away with salt (unless, of course they are thoroughly cleaned immediately). This is why swimming in the ocean is not recommended. More than likely Chlorine will have a similar (and much faster) effect of these seals (depending on what elastomer is used for the seals (it might be a polyacrylate or FEPM based on poor sea water compatibility)
I haven't seen any product ever stated as "water-proof", even watches. Ones rated for 200m depths still say "water-resistant" up to 200m (from what I have seen). Consumer laws are pretty tight in Australia so maybe marketing terms have to be adjusted though.
I haven't once seen Sony use anything but water resistant to describe it. Nor have they shown footage exaggerating or misleading it's water resistance.
If people are too stupid to distinguish the difference between the terms for them selves, and use a little common sense, then perhaps they shouldn't have a "smart" phone
Regarding the swimming thing, a telco here put out a video of their rep "falling" into a pool and demonstrated that the phone will be ok. Then went on to use the phone proving that yes it was fine. So if you accidentally jumped in with it would it be fine? Most likely. Should you deliberately do swimming with it? Absolutely not. Most pools are well over 1m depth so straight off the bat it shouldn't be in there
I was once interested in the Galaxy S4 Active, but four important things have kept me away from it altogether:
I just got the S4 in April, so I'd need to sell it to buy a new Active (and there would be a price difference of course).
The S4A is only waterproof to 3ft or so (some reports of less than that). And for only 30min at that.
Probably most importantly: I hear there's no liquid coverage in the warranty still, even though it's designed to be submerged!
8MP camera? What gives? One of the biggest bragging rights of the S4 is the 13MP camera.
That being said, I want to waterproof my S4, so that I can completely submerge it. I mean, like bottom-of-the-14ft-pool submerge, while still taking pictures, even. I'd consider hacking the S4A camera app onto the S4 just for the Aqua mode it has (and maybe try to hack in the 13MP capability too?).
Key thing, though: I don't normally use a case on my phone. I like the slimness of my naked phone.
So, I've seen different nano-coatings (liquipel for example - or even the NeverWet spray). Most of them coat the outside of the phone, and don't offer submersion as an option. They're designed for "accidental spills only". Here's what I want from a nano-coating:
Submersible to say, 15ft. Maybe 10ft would be acceptable.
No time limit.
I'm willing to completely disassemble my phone to coat the motherboard, inside and out, if needed.
Some form of guarantee against water damage would be nice. I swear that I saw one company that offered this, but I can't seem to find it now.
I'm curious how this stuff would work with heat dissipation on the motherboard components. Also, how well would the contacts work after? Examples would be the connections to the motherboard (for the screen, or daughterboard, or cameras...), or even the battery connection? Does nanocoating interfere with these?
Anywho, the point of this thread is to ask the S4 community about different brands of nano-coating/water-proofing options. It might be impossible to get exactly what I want, but I'd be curious to see how close I could get.
Thanks for your time.
I highly doubt you will find a nano coating that can meet your needs.
Regarding the neverwet spray, I recently read a review on it and it only lasted roughly 30 minutes in water before the coating began to deteriorate plus it makes the device sticky.
Your best bet would probably be a case even though you specifically asked for a nano coating. LifeProof juat recently released an S3 case and its safe too assume an S4 case is in the works aswell.
Sent from my SGH-I337M using Tapatalk 4 Beta
msavic6 said:
I highly doubt you will find a nano coating that can meet your needs.
Regarding the neverwet spray, I recently read a review on it and it only lasted roughly 30 minutes in water before the coating began to deteriorate plus it makes the device sticky.
Your best bet would probably be a case even though you specifically asked for a nano coating. LifeProof juat recently released an S3 case and its safe too assume an S4 case is in the works aswell.
Sent from my SGH-I337M using Tapatalk 4 Beta
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, that's what I'm gathering. Thank you for the feedback. I did find that it was Liquipel that offers the guarantee against water damage, but only with accidental exposure only (explicitly prohibits intentional submersion). I happen to be travelling over in the L.A. area soon (near their HQ), so I've asked them two questions this weekend, without response:
If I were to bring in my device to have it treated, would they allow me to physically disassemble the device and let them place the individual components into the chamber?
If I were to invest in a nice waterproof case, and for some reason the case failed to protect the device, would the Liquipel guarantee protect the device at this point?
I'm thinking that a lot of these nano-coatings will give-out after 30 minutes of continuous water exposure. That's why I'm thinking of a really good waterproof case for intentional diving with the phone, and then the liquipel for all the accidental stuff (as intended). It'd be nice to go to a theme park and ride the water-rides without risking anything.
Eventually when LifeProof releases their Galaxy S4 case which shouldn't be that bulky in comparison too other waterproof cases you could buy the case and apply the Liquipel coating. This way you have a 2 step barrier for any water damage, if the case gives way too water, the liquipel should protect it and any damage should be covered by their warranty.
Sent from my SGH-I337M using Tapatalk 4 Beta
msavic6 said:
Eventually when LifeProof releases their Galaxy S4 case which shouldn't be that bulky in comparison too other waterproof cases you could buy the case and apply the Liquipel coating. This way you have a 2 step barrier for any water damage, if the case gives way too water, the liquipel should protect it and any damage should be covered by their warranty.
Sent from my SGH-I337M using Tapatalk 4 Beta
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I called Liquipel today, because apparently the monkeys behind their keyboards don't respond to emails.
- They will allow me to disassemble the device, have it coated by them, and then I would have to re-assemble it myself. No problem.
- They recently had another customer with a LifeProof case file a claim. The LifeProof case leaked on his iPhone (dunno which model) without the customer knowing, and the water sat for a long time. The corrosion/etc. that resulted was too great, and Liquipel would not cover the device. The customer had to buy a new device, which Liquipel subsequently treated the new device for free.
But yeah, if LifeProof created a case for S3, there's little doubt they would not create one for the S4. The only fallback would be if the S3 case didn't sell well - at which point they might re-think creating a case for the S4.
Everything started a while ago, sd card stopped working properly with error "sd card unexpectedly removed", then wifi begins to drop connection.
Nothing to lose, i thought. I read that baking helped some G4 users. Disassembled the phone, took out motherboard and put it in an oven for 7mins (185C/365F)
Results: It worked! Sd card works fine, wifi is good. But effect lasted only for 4 days =). This morning I’ve got "sd card unexpectedly removed" again. Wifi is still working though.
This is my experience I’d like to share.
PSA: I've googled much for sd-card and wifi issues with g3, and if you've experience any of these: sdcard, sim card, wifi, display issues - it's the beginning of the end. You'd better start looking for a replacement.
Also, I’d strongly recommend you not to buy used G3. The risk you'll get phone that won't last long is very high.
(sorry for poor english)
Hi mate, sorry to read this story, but exactly same situation happrned with my fiancee g3. Exact the same order of things, i was also trying to bake it but it didnt helped.
PS. It was also bought 2nd hand.
This makes no logical sense at all. Could someone please explain to me what you think baking the mainboard does?
The only possible reason for doing this that I can think of is to dry it out if it got submerged in water for an extended period of time. However, the phone naturally gets hot enough to evaporate any internal moisture quite quickly so there goes that theory.
I think what is happening for the strange folks that do this, is just the process of disassembling and reassembling the phone cleans up the ribbon connections and helps dirty contacts.
I strongly recommend no one with any common sense bake their mainboard.
The only possible reason for doing this that I can think of is to dry it out if it got submerged in water
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The idea is to reflow solder joints. (at least google says so =)
think what is happening for the strange folks that do this, is just the process of disassembling and reassembling the phone cleans up the ribbon connections and helps dirty contacts.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No. The phone was reassembled millions times before with no such effect. And it never been in water.
Anyway, this is quite popular recipe to "fix" G3 and G4. I'm not claiming it will help. Just share my experience.
https://www.reddit.com/r/LGG3/comments/550a3u/just_bake_it_in_the_oven/
https://www.reddit.com/r/LGG3/comments/5e0nx7/info_for_those_thinking_about_baking_their/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikFbhcyO3Nk
UvarovG said:
The idea is to reflow solder joints. (at least google says so =)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea, sorry, you can't believe everything you see on the internet. Even this! lol. But, anyone experienced in soldering will tell ya that to repair a bad solder you need to remove all existing solder, re-apply flux, and re-solder (usually on a room temp bread board! lol). If you just re-heat existing solder you will usually increase resistance and weaken the solder contact even more.
Furthermore, I'm not aware of any solder points on the G3 board that sustain any kind of wear or movement. AND, when you bake the board you're also baking the SoC! :crying: If you got bad solder contacts because of overheating, then your SoC is probably fried anyways.
Whole thing smells bad to me, and I caution others to stay away from this.
There might not be enough heat inside a mobile phone to melt the solder joints, however the continuous stress from heating up and cooling down will weaken the crystaline structure and eventually make the solder joint break.
If you can manage to apply flux to the cracked solder you can usually recover the joint by reflowing it, however in case of BGAs (Ball Grid Array) microchips with hundreds of contacts (balls), where all solder joints are "sandwiched" between the PCB and chip , it's very hard to do so without the access to professional tools.
Reflowing in a household oven is usually just a temporary fix, as no flux manages to reach the broken joint, so all you do with reflowing is melting the cracked solder, which will stay weakend after cooling down again. New cracks in the crystaline structure will form pretty quickly. That's why baking will make the device work for a limited period of time.
The use of less reliable / proven solder compositions (aka leadfree vs leaded solder) also plays a role in this. Leaded solder is usually superior to lead free solder in regards to long time solder joint stability.
A better type of fix would be to reball the BGA, however this usually involves the ues of special tools. When you reball a chip you remove it from the circuit board (usually using hot air) and remove all the old weakend solder and put new, healthy solder blobs (balls) on the chip and then reassemble it.
Cheers.
AlwaysLucky said:
Yea, sorry, you can't believe everything you see on the internet. Even this! lol. But, anyone experienced in soldering will tell ya that to repair a bad solder you need to remove all existing solder, re-apply flux, and re-solder (usually on a room temp bread board! lol). If you just re-heat existing solder you will usually increase resistance and weaken the solder contact even more.
Furthermore, I'm not aware of any solder points on the G3 board that sustain any kind of wear or movement. AND, when you bake the board you're also baking the SoC! :crying: If you got bad solder contacts because of overheating, then your SoC is probably fried anyways.
Whole thing smells bad to me, and I caution others to stay away from this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Might as well bake away...because the phone is going to be dead soon anyway.
It's probably not a wear/movement issue - it's an LG quality issue. They had a bad run of boards that made it into the field. Anything from board contamination/improper handling, poor soldering techniques, bad solder, etc. can cause faulty solder joints that fail over time as the soc heats and cools over and over. Better R&D and higher quality standards at the manufacturing plants should prevent issues like this, but hey - sh*t happens sometimes. At least we didn't have the G4 bootloop issue caused by... "After a prolonged investigation, LG has identified the source of the problem as a “loose contact between components” and vowed to repair it..." http://www.androidauthority.com/lg-admits-g4-bootloop-problem-hardware-fault-669603/
Some people "fixed" their issues temporarily by either: a)putting tape on strategic parts of the board which then creates enough pressure when the phone is reassembeld to temporarily "fix" the faulty solder joint(s); or b) by - frighteningly (but doing so as a last resort, so I get the reason for trying it) - baking the mother board for another temporary "fix" of the faulty solder joints. And yes, from personal experience trying to repair a friend's phone, it does actually work for a short time until the solder joints fail again.
I agree with you that the only way to truly fix it is to remove the old solder, clean everything up, reflux and resolder - but that isn't cost feasible for most people who don't have a bga solder machine laying around. Bottom line is once the G3 acts up and re-soldering is the only way to bring it back to life - it's time to start shopping for a new phone.
startswithPendswithOOH said:
Might as well bake away...because the phone is going to be dead soon anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, and you will kill it much faster by baking it at 185C to soften the lead-free solder. If you do that, you will ruin the SoC which is only meant to handle temps up to 80C. Not to mention you will increase electrical resistance at the solder points.
I know, that would be sooo cool if this had any kind of possibility of doing any good at all. But, the science and physics is simply not there. This is an old-wives tale, a myth, a hoax. Call it what you will, but never encourage anyone to do this. Ever.
AlwaysLucky said:
Call it what you will, but never encourage anyone to do this. Ever.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed. Never bake electronics. It's common sense.
Now if the phone is dead anyway and someone has nothing to lose & wants to give it a shot that's up to them, but even if it does help it won't be long lasting. Just buy a new phone and save the frustration.
relevant link https://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/5tw0ev/fix_your_nexus_5x_by_tossing_the_board_in_the_oven/
While using an "oven" to solder components is an actual technique, it's certainly not done in a home oven, and certainly not done the way most of those guides show.
I have repeated countless times in countless LG G3 threads with issues but no one wants to listen -- DO NOT PUT YOUR MOTHERBOARD IN THE OVEN.
This is not actual, proper repair steps. You might get lucky, and start working for a few days, and then it will be worse. As explained by many others in this thread, if not done properly, you will only further weaken the bad solder connections.
It has been caused that problems in the phone are caused by connections getting loose/overheating over time. Not all phones are prone to it, and surely use scenario will have something to do with it.
A better repairing technique for this would be applying pressure with a thermal pad to the SoC. This technique can also be found in many places around the forum. Another small non-conductive piece like paper or plastic from an old debit card would work as well, but thermal pads are best suited so they can help with the heat dissipation.
@UvarovG linked a great thread with a lot of relevant content in it if you are actually interested in learning.
Here are some links:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Shn7LdIrViQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1AcEt073Uds
And others.
I've been using my Priv for a year and a half now, without showing it much mercy. Without a case and a screen protector, it held up very well until I took a fall while holding it and cracked the screen. I decided to transplant my motherboard into a defective but like-new unit, and was shocked to see how the heat from the 808 distorted the copper foil that was supposed to help dissipate it. Also, my unit had way too much thermal paste just poured in it, which seems like an afterthought because the upside of the processor doesn't touch any proper heatsink - only the metal frame of the middle of the phone. After reading that a user achieved some improvement by sticking tinfoil between his 810 equipped Xperia Z3+ and an external case, I decided to try to put some tinfoil between the back side of the processor and the back casing. Removing the back housing is very easy and doesn't require any tools, so later modifications and tweaks are not a problem. I covered almost the entire back of the device with tinfoil and closed the housing back on it. The result is quite amazing - the spot where the 808 is placed, where the device used to get so hot I could not comfortably touch it, is now only mildly warm. To confirm that this solution actually worked, I installed antutu both on the modified and on the donor device. The modified unit held the processor at 1500 mhz under the stress test and did not feel hot at all. The unmodified unit dropped quickly to 1200 mhz and stayed there for the entire test. The unit feels a little snappier now, but I do think that the major improvement is in not having to hold that hot potato anymore. Regardless of this fairy tail, I will be purchasing the Key2. Another lesson learned from comparing my old device to the new one is how much an amoled panel degrades in the course of 18 months. I am not bothered by burn in (the bottom stripe is bright compared to the rest of the display), but the display itself is much less vibrant and the colors are much warmer after all that use. It will be hard to part with the beautiful colors I get from the new replacement panel, but overall an LCD has the advantages of maintaining its quality over time, and also being much cheaper to replace. A screen for the Priv costs around $120, while Keyone LCDs cost less than $50.
I wouldn't try that for these reasons:
1: tinfoil is conductive AFAIK, so it might cause an undesired shortcircuit between some exposed contacts
2: for the same reason, it might impact the antennas
However it makes sense from a thermal only point of view!
I'm just curious if you considered the points above and took care of where and how to place the tinfoil?
And did you notice any change in reception quility?