or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple rumored to use sapphire screen for 'iWatch,' but not next-gen iPhone
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple rumored to use sapphire screen for 'iWatch,' but not next-gen iPhone - Page 2

post #41 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBird61 View Post

Much is being made about capacity and cost. The assumption is that the iPhone 6 will be ONE model and it is an all or nothing proposition for sapphire.

Much like the iPhone 5S and 5C models, I envision a premium model costing hundreds more WITH the sapphire screens and certainly other upgrades, as well as a lower cost option WITHOUT sapphire for a broader customer base.

This allows for the arguments regarding capacity ramp in Arizona to be moot (if capacity is indeed limited at launch - some argue otherwise) and only limiting customer choice and not limiting customer access to the iPhone 6. It also makes the cost issue moot as it allows the customer to choose whether they pick the premium package including sapphire along with the added cost, or the more basic model.

As a side note, some argue the cost difference between GTAT sapphire and GLW glass is dwindling: http://seekingalpha.com/article/1957211

I can agree with your message here.  I'll be one of those paying up for the sapphire, if (and only if) it doesn't sacrifice structural integrity to gain scratch resistance.  In other words, if it shatters more easily than Gorilla Glass, then count me out.  I want it all if I'm paying more $$.  ;)

post #42 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro View Post


I highly recommend you follow their sources as they have simply quoted someone else then inflated the numbers dramatically.

So what are the numbers ordered per your source? and is there a link?

post #43 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfc1138 View Post

So what are the numbers ordered per your source? and is there a link?

Follow their source until you find the original source.
post #44 of 60
Not sure why all these people on the Apple forums think that sapphire is more brittle than GG. It is like they never bothered to research it and are just making some assumptions based on conventional wisdom or the laughable press releases from Corning. GTAT paid for third party independent testing and the results speak for themselves. Corning basically released some press release that says sapphire is more fragile based on one of their tests. The fact that they decided to say sapphire is more brittle based on some cherry picked test and don't seem to want independent analysis speaks for itself. GG scratches and basically that is what leads to cracks and why sapphire will be much harder to crack.

When, all you people get your sapphire screen and see how many less cracks the Iphone gets you will look like idiots for saying it is more fragile than GG. Anyway, people who keep saying sapphire is more brittle have their facts completely wrong and need to educate themselves. http://electronics.wesrch.com/page-summary-pdf-EL1NABM8TGWZG-sapphire-touch-performance-and-design-guidelines-for-display-cover-screens-9
post #45 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by harris77 View Post

GG scratches and basically that is what leads to cracks and why sapphire will be much harder to crack.

You had me up until that sentence. Hardness and strength are not the same thing. Just compare glass, CR-39 and polycarbonate lenses to see how the ability to shatter or crack v the ability to scratch.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #46 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by harris77 View Post

Not sure why all these people on the Apple forums think that sapphire is more brittle than GG. It is like they never bothered to research it and are just making some assumptions based on conventional wisdom or the laughable press releases from Corning. GTAT paid for third party independent testing and the results speak for themselves. Corning basically released some press release that says sapphire is more fragile based on one of their tests. The fact that they decided to say sapphire is more brittle based on some cherry picked test and don't seem to want independent analysis speaks for itself. GG scratches and basically that is what leads to cracks and why sapphire will be much harder to crack.

When, all you people get your sapphire screen and see how many less cracks the Iphone gets you will look like idiots for saying it is more fragile than GG. Anyway, people who keep saying sapphire is more brittle have their facts completely wrong and need to educate themselves. http://electronics.wesrch.com/page-summary-pdf-EL1NABM8TGWZG-sapphire-touch-performance-and-design-guidelines-for-display-cover-screens-9

 

I don't think everyone is saying that but, in any case, it is a misleading statement. Brittle simply means low strain to failure, but since strain is a function of stress, related by the appropriate modulus (in the elastic regime) and more complete constitutive equation (in the plastic regime), brittleness alone says nothing about ease of fracture. Sapphire is quite brittle, but also much stronger (especially in tension - which controls crack formation), and, if used on an appropriate structure, less prone to cracking.

post #47 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by harris77 View Post

GG scratches and basically that is what leads to cracks and why sapphire will be much harder to crack.

You had me up until that sentence. Hardness and strength are not the same thing. Just compare glass, CR-39 and polycarbonate lenses to see how the ability to shatter or crack v the ability to scratch.

 

Exactly correct. Scratch resistance is dominated by hardness, while crack resistance is determined by both tensile strength and strain to failure.  In other words there are at least a couple of different reasons why a material may resist cracking:

 

(1)  It has high strain to failure and will support substantial deformation without tensile failure (e.g. many plastics and ductile metals), but is not necessarily strong, and could be very weak.

 

(2)  It has high tensile strength, which may more than mitigate a low strain to failure.

 

Many steels are far more brittle than, for example, copper, but much more resistant to tensile failure because of their much higher moduli. 

post #48 of 60
Apple will not add sapphire glass on the iPhone just because they can. They are not samsung. Makes a lot more sense on a watch.
post #49 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemyNX View Post

Apple will not add sapphire glass on the iPhone just because they can. They are not samsung. Makes a lot more sense on a watch.

No, Apple will not add something just because they can. But they will add something just because they want to. Often, their wants line up with a greater user experience. Sometimes, not so much. But they always have their own rationale, which is much more rational than many competitors.

post #50 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by StruckPaper View Post

No, Apple will not add something just because they can.
Not unheard of, they added Coverflow everywhere, with seemingly little regard for how useful it is. And in physical attributes the razor handles on the metal Mac Pro. Arguably the glass back on the iPhone 4 was a "because they can" feature too, rather than something useful in itself.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #51 of 60

That's an insightful comment. For Apple to succeed in the future it has to be constantly innovating, avoiding the machinations of the 'Me2' brigade, whilst maintaining the support of those of us who continue to use their products. I'll have to sign off, we are currently in the middle of a 100 mph+ storm.

 

Greatrix.

post #52 of 60
The next iPhone not having sapphire glass will just be another reason to bring down the share price and say Apple isn't innovating.
post #53 of 60
Remember when Apple paid 12M for that Swiss watch face design? I think they are making a watch.
What is really factored into the price is a kind of perpetual sense of disbelief that any company could be as good as Apple is. ~Retrogusto
Reply
What is really factored into the price is a kind of perpetual sense of disbelief that any company could be as good as Apple is. ~Retrogusto
Reply
post #54 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

Not unheard of, they added Coverflow everywhere, with seemingly little regard for how useful it is. And in physical attributes the razor handles on the metal Mac Pro. Arguably the glass back on the iPhone 4 was a "because they can" feature too, rather than something useful in itself.

Those were design choices that didn't impact the price as much as adding a sapphire cover glass would.
post #55 of 60
So Sapphire Glass means no flexible oled? As far as I know sapphire glass doesn't bend well, if at all.
post #56 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chipsy View Post

So Sapphire Glass means no flexible oled? As far as I know sapphire glass doesn't bend well, if at all.

 

Yes - I was wondering about that too. It would seem to rule out the flexible, curved design that keeps being floated.

post #57 of 60
Originally Posted by Chipsy View Post
So Sapphire Glass means no flexible oled? As far as I know sapphire glass doesn't bend well, if at all.

 

Apple using OLED was fantasy in the first place.

post #58 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

Yes - I was wondering about that too. It would seem to rule out the flexible, curved design that keeps being floated.

I think the terms flexible and curved get conflated too often in these rumors. I can see a non-flat (in terms of being beveled) sapphire component to an iWatch, but not necessary a curved display underneath. If there is a curved display I'd still expect it to be inflexible. I don't think we're at a point where we can make these "computery" components stand up to the wear and tear of being flexed repeatedly.
Edited by SolipsismX - 2/13/14 at 11:35am

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #59 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

Yes - I was wondering about that too. It would seem to rule out the flexible, curved design that keeps being floated.

I think the terms flexible and curved get conflated too often in these rumors. I can see a non-flat (in terms of being beveled) sapphire component to an iWatch, but not necessary a curved display underneath. If there is a curved display I'd still expect it to be inflexible. I don't think we're at a point where we can make these "computery" components are able to stand the wear of being flexed repeatedly.

 

Yes - that makes sense. I think I've been seduced by the "artists" impressions that imply sleek, curved bands with integrated screens. Maybe next year.

post #60 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chipsy View Post

So Sapphire Glass means no flexible oled? As far as I know sapphire glass doesn't bend well, if at all.

Actually it can be flexible, and so formed into a curved surface: depends on how thick the material is: on the original tech companies webpages (they were bought by GT Advanced, IIRC they were more focused on solar panels while GT advanced is more general) they showed a Saphire laminate on a metal sheet rolled up quite nicely. And in many of the reports on GT Advanced and Apple laminates are specifically mentioned...

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Apple rumored to use sapphire screen for 'iWatch,' but not next-gen iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple rumored to use sapphire screen for 'iWatch,' but not next-gen iPhone