> Otterbox case on it adds just as much extra weight, and I don't see many people complaining about those
Irks me that not one single phone manufacturer dares to ship a product as indestructible as an iphone in an Otterbox. Sure it would be the clunkiest handset in the store, but compare it to other phones + case, there's room to make a superior final product. But no. Apple keeps shaving millimeters and Otterbox keeps slathering them back on.
You can definitely buy more rugged phones. Often they lag behind in specs compared to popular flagship models, but they're not bad. For instance, I currently use a CAT S60 phone: http://www.catphones.com/en-gb/phones/s60-smartphone
After a normal day of use I'll still have 60% of battery life. It's normally water resistant down to 6 feet for 30 minutes, flipping two switches makes it water resistant down to 15 feet for 30 minutes (and it even comes with a "drying" app that helps it to dry faster by, I think, vibrating the speakers.)
This particular phone comes with FLIR imaging, which probably isn't useful to the general population...
But a few have done what you suggest. At least slightly. The Galaxy s6 came in an active version that had like 30% more battery and better water resistance and a slightly tougher default shell.
I don't know how their sales were for the 2 models but I hope they were good enough to continue the trend
Irks me that not one single phone manufacturer dares to ship a product as indestructible as an iphone in an Otterbox. Sure it would be the clunkiest handset in the store, but compare it to other phones + case, there's room to make a superior final product. But no. Apple keeps shaving millimeters and Otterbox keeps slathering them back on.