obvious need for a klutz-proof phone

My Sony Ericsson was stepped on (we think), which broke the screen, so I was looking through AT&T choices for a replacement.  I was seriously considering a refurbished Rugby phone, which was the only "rugged" option in the free category.  Looking through the user reviews, there were a lot of complaints about the "Push To Talk" button being in the way so that users were hitting it inadvertently all the time.  It was notable that, in nearly all the reviews, nobody wanted the Push to Talk feature.  The phone was designed for job sites, construction workers in a team, that sort of thing, where Push To Talk would be useful.  But many people were buying it because, just like me, they wanted something less likely to break.  (I also liked that reviewers said it was very loud and easy to hear through background noise.  I could never hear my Ericsson sufficiently without putting it on speaker.)

There is a definite need for a rugged phone for individual users.  One with a good volume control.  One where you won't inadvertently connect to the Internet and be charged for it.  Why is this not among the current choices?

The other thing that annoyed me was the lack of protection for the camera lenses. My old Ericson's lens was covered when the phone number pad was slid closed.   All of the 2 MPixel and above camera lenses on cell phones that I saw in the AT&T store are exposed.  There was one 1.3 MPixel camera phone that did protect its lens.  Kind of ridiculous.