Corning exec lets slip the gorillas of war, calls sapphire expensive, heavy, environmentally unfrien
During a conference call on Tuesday, Corning Glass executive Tony Tripeny named the apparently numerous drawbacks to using sapphire crystal in a mobile device, something which Apple is widely expected to do with an upcoming iPhone.
At the Morgan Stanley Technology, Media & Telecom Conference (via Seeking Alpha), analyst James Fawcett warmed up with a round of general questions regarding the health of Corning's business, but the conversation quickly turned to Gorilla Glass and sapphire, reports CNET.
The two Corning executives in attendance, CFO James Flaws and SVP and Corporate Controller Tripeny, successfully dodged an initial question about the possible risks sapphire presents to Gorilla Glass and Corning's hold on the mobile device industry. A more direct follow-up from Fawcett hit the mark.
"So we mentioned Sapphire and obviously there is one large handset and device maker that people suspect maybe looking at Sapphire," Fawcett said, assumedly alluding to Apple. "And at least from a Corning perspective, [what are] the puts and takes of Sapphire versus glass?"
Tripeny fielded the question by offering a laundry list of negatives. Corning has not been overly talkative on the implications of sapphire, though the company has obviously been thinking hard on the subject, as evidenced by a page on its website titled "Corning Gorilla Glass vs. Sapphire."
"When we look at it, we see a lot of disadvantages of Sapphire versus Gorilla Glass," Tripeny said. "It's about 10 times more expensive. It's about 1.6 times heavier. It's environmentally unfriendly. It takes about 100 times more energy to generate a Sapphire crystal than it does glass. It transmits less light which...means either dimmer devices or shorter battery life. It continues to break."
While Tripeny conceded sapphire is a highly scratch resistant material, he pointed out that Corning tests have shown Gorilla Glass to be able to withstand 2.5 times more pressure. Overall, sapphire is an "industry and trend" not attractive in consumer devices, he said.
Apple seems to think otherwise. In November, the company announced a partnership with sapphire producer GT Advanced Technology worth $578 million. As part of the deal, a new facility built in Arizona will supply Apple with a large amount of sapphire for use in future products yet to be announced.
Currently, Apple uses sapphire as protective shielding for the iPhone 5s' rear camera lens and Touch ID home button. The company first dabbled with the material in the iPhone 5, which also employed a sapphire-covered rear-facing camera.
As Corning stands to lose a major source of revenue if Apple decides to switch away from Gorilla Glass in favor of its own sapphire-based solution, the company is understandably a detractor of the burgeoning tech.
Tripeny does raise some interesting points, however, not the least of which is the impact of using sapphire from a cost standpoint. Citing knowledge about crystal growing from the Dow Corning joint venture, the exec points to a three disadvantages to sapphire production.
Again, Tripeny compares the material to Gorilla Glass: forming sapphire takes approximately 4,000 times longer than Gorilla Glass and at a "significantly higher" melting temperature; machining the material is difficult and costly due to its innate hardness; and the costs rise "exponentially" when defects form during the growing process because they need to be cut out.
"If it was a business that was attractive to enter into, we certainly would be able to do that," Tripeny said.
While Apple's sapphire endgame remains unknown, the company has secured or filed for a number of patents relating to sapphire laminates and other more exotic mobile device components. In addition, properties describing manufacturing and processing techniques have also been revealed.
As for Corning, the firm is apparently not looking to enter the sapphire industry anytime soon, even if large OEMs like Apple and Samsung are turning to the material as a "deluxe" value-added feature.
Finally, when asked if there was anything else that may factor into the sapphire conversation, Tripeny said, "It has got a very sexy name. Sapphire."
At the Morgan Stanley Technology, Media & Telecom Conference (via Seeking Alpha), analyst James Fawcett warmed up with a round of general questions regarding the health of Corning's business, but the conversation quickly turned to Gorilla Glass and sapphire, reports CNET.
The two Corning executives in attendance, CFO James Flaws and SVP and Corporate Controller Tripeny, successfully dodged an initial question about the possible risks sapphire presents to Gorilla Glass and Corning's hold on the mobile device industry. A more direct follow-up from Fawcett hit the mark.
"So we mentioned Sapphire and obviously there is one large handset and device maker that people suspect maybe looking at Sapphire," Fawcett said, assumedly alluding to Apple. "And at least from a Corning perspective, [what are] the puts and takes of Sapphire versus glass?"
Tripeny fielded the question by offering a laundry list of negatives. Corning has not been overly talkative on the implications of sapphire, though the company has obviously been thinking hard on the subject, as evidenced by a page on its website titled "Corning Gorilla Glass vs. Sapphire."
"When we look at it, we see a lot of disadvantages of Sapphire versus Gorilla Glass," Tripeny said. "It's about 10 times more expensive. It's about 1.6 times heavier. It's environmentally unfriendly. It takes about 100 times more energy to generate a Sapphire crystal than it does glass. It transmits less light which...means either dimmer devices or shorter battery life. It continues to break."
While Tripeny conceded sapphire is a highly scratch resistant material, he pointed out that Corning tests have shown Gorilla Glass to be able to withstand 2.5 times more pressure. Overall, sapphire is an "industry and trend" not attractive in consumer devices, he said.
Apple seems to think otherwise. In November, the company announced a partnership with sapphire producer GT Advanced Technology worth $578 million. As part of the deal, a new facility built in Arizona will supply Apple with a large amount of sapphire for use in future products yet to be announced.
Currently, Apple uses sapphire as protective shielding for the iPhone 5s' rear camera lens and Touch ID home button. The company first dabbled with the material in the iPhone 5, which also employed a sapphire-covered rear-facing camera.
As Corning stands to lose a major source of revenue if Apple decides to switch away from Gorilla Glass in favor of its own sapphire-based solution, the company is understandably a detractor of the burgeoning tech.
Tripeny does raise some interesting points, however, not the least of which is the impact of using sapphire from a cost standpoint. Citing knowledge about crystal growing from the Dow Corning joint venture, the exec points to a three disadvantages to sapphire production.
Again, Tripeny compares the material to Gorilla Glass: forming sapphire takes approximately 4,000 times longer than Gorilla Glass and at a "significantly higher" melting temperature; machining the material is difficult and costly due to its innate hardness; and the costs rise "exponentially" when defects form during the growing process because they need to be cut out.
"If it was a business that was attractive to enter into, we certainly would be able to do that," Tripeny said.
While Apple's sapphire endgame remains unknown, the company has secured or filed for a number of patents relating to sapphire laminates and other more exotic mobile device components. In addition, properties describing manufacturing and processing techniques have also been revealed.
As for Corning, the firm is apparently not looking to enter the sapphire industry anytime soon, even if large OEMs like Apple and Samsung are turning to the material as a "deluxe" value-added feature.
Finally, when asked if there was anything else that may factor into the sapphire conversation, Tripeny said, "It has got a very sexy name. Sapphire."
Comments
http://www.boardwalkcm.com/blog-profile.php?ID=22
Come on Corning, thanks to Apple you had a good run, don't be a sore loser.
I believe people tend to take much better care of their iPhones than Samsung users take care of their devices. I see people with cracked Samsung screens all the time. I've only seen one cracked iPhone and that was due to a horse stepping on it. If people do accidently crack their iPhone screens, they must get them replaced pretty quickly because I just don't ever see them.
From an article from Patently Apple titled "Apple may Shift to Sapphire Crystal Glass for Future iDevices":
"According to a new report by MIT Technology Review, there are a number of manufacturers in the US that are experimenting at making sapphire sheets thinner than a human hair which is much thinner than today's Gorilla Glass. That would in turn lighten the iPhone which Apple strives for continually while translating into savings in shipping costs. A little here a little there and it begins to make sense for Apple to start experimenting with this glass. Corning's competitors are beginning to talk about manufacturing sapphire glass for between $6 to $9 per smartphone cover versus $20 to $30 that it sells for today. So it's in Corning's interest to be able to offer Apple a sapphire product or an equivalent."
http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2013/03/apple-may-shift-to-sapphire-crystal-glass-for-future-idevices.html
Exactly. I've no doubt that someone would've found the use for Gorilla Glass eventually but as it stands it was Apple/Steve Jobs. It is in Corning's business interest to downplay Sapphire but when one protests too much, it usually means that feathers are being ruffled (to be followed, no doubt, by gorilla glasses being thrown against the wall).
I believe people tend to take much better care of their iPhones than Samsung users take care of their devices. I see people with cracked Samsung screens all the time. I've only seen one cracked iPhone and that was due to a horse stepping on it. If people do accidently crack their iPhone screens, they must get them replaced pretty quickly because I just don't ever see them.
That may have a bit to do with income disparity as well. iPhone users have a bit more income, so they probably get their phones fixed quickly as they can afford to do so.
It's not just that the phone cover will be sapphire, there is a very good possibility it will also contain solar charging tech. Imagine that, a solar powered plant producing screens that power an iPhone by solar.
Corning sees this coming and are unsurprisingly, spooked. I would be too, in their shoes. If this turns out to be true, it would be a major game changer and a serious threat to Corning's profits.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/2062083-gt-advanced-technologies-is-ready-to-electrify-the-mobile-world
I don't know why they are even concerned, after all Android has 80% of the market!
/s
/s
/s
I believe people tend to take much better care of their iPhones than Samsung users take care of their devices. I see people with cracked Samsung screens all the time. I've only seen one cracked iPhone and that was due to a horse stepping on it. If people do accidently crack their iPhone screens, they must get them replaced pretty quickly because I just don't ever see them.
That's because those big, all in one Samsung screens are so much more expensive than iPhone screens to replace.
Corning's Gorilla Glass was a forgotten piece of tech until Apple revived it and made Corning not only a boatload of money from Apple, but from all the other copyists that decided to incorporate it into their devices. Corning will continue to make tons of money (although not as much) from all those other device makers.
Maybe Corning should thank Apple for making them relevant again, instead of coming across like some whiny b!tch?
I don't know. An iPhone is like a precious piece of jewelry so people treat them carefully. On the other hand if you break your Samsung screen where do you take it to be replaced? They don't really have a Genius Bar do they?
Corning's Gorilla Glass was a forgotten piece of tech until Apple revived it and made Corning not only a boatload of money from Apple, but from all the other copyists that decided to incorporate it into their devices. Corning will continue to make tons of money (although not as much) from all those other device makers.
Maybe Corning should thank Apple for making them relevant again, instead of coming across like some whiny b!tch?
Right, because smartphone glass is the leading profit center for Corning. Not.
In reality, a composite of both Gorilla and Sapphire is an optimal solution for Apple. Corning going after Sapphire is just stupid from a partnership situation, never mind useless fodder when they don't disclose the carbon footprint of their own assembly processes, across the board, comparing them to Sapphire Glass.
Love the headline!
"Shall in these confines with Tony's voice - cry havoc and let slip the gorillas of war"!
The fact that Corning is making these statements makes me think that iPhones will move to Sapphire either this year or the next. Some contract was not extended or some clause was raised and Corning is gagged from saying anything about the situation. Hence they are running down Sapphire.
Except that Corning, Inc. is in a major joint venture that is not in Apple's BFF list, Samsung Corning Precision Glass
Not surprising coming from a company who sees the competition ahead.
It's not just that the phone cover will be sapphire, there is a very good possibility it will also contain solar charging tech. Imagine that, a solar powered plant producing screens that power an iPhone by solar.
Corning sees this coming and are unsurprisingly, spooked. I would be too, in their shoes. If this turns out to be true, it would be a major game changer and a serious threat to Corning's profits.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/2062083-gt-advanced-technologies-is-ready-to-electrify-the-mobile-world
that's really fascinating, thanx. self-charging phones and pads would be pretty amazing, and only need a smaller battery, so thinner and lighter too. they could charge even when 'turned off' as long as there's light.
might work great for a smart watch especially. their small screens would keep the per unit costs modest, the thin screens can be easily curved, and the thinner the watch is, the better its esthetics.
but nevermind. everyone knows the days of Apple "innovation" ended when Steve passed. so what if they made an exclusive deal two years after that with the leading sapphire tech firm that's years ahead, are building its factory, and will probably buy it outright like they did Authentec.
besides, i want my removable battery! and SD card slot. and USB port. and IR blaster. and darn i miss Flash too. that's my kind of real innovation!
I had a solar powered watch. It was always running out of power because it was either under my shirt sleeve or on my night stand. Neither situation offered enough light to keep it charged. I also had a watch that charged by centrifugal force or whatever swinging arm motion is and it worked flawlessly. But I don't wear wristwatches anymore. Someone might get the wrong impression that I actually care what time it is or that it is some fashion accessory.
Is genius really the most appropriate term when the bar has been set so low.
Solar isn't practical unless it can be added without any significant cost or bulk because even a few extra percent could come in handy, but I think it's doubtful.
A kinetic option on the wrist would be great but I am certain the power requirement for anything that I'd call a smartwatch would be far too high for that to be a reality.