Your ignorance is blatant. Apple has never "listened" to their customers. Neither does Ferrari.
They just make what they think are really, really awesome products. If you don't like them; just move on to something you do like. It's that simple, and it always has been.
It's laughable you don't realize this.
That is ridiculous. Just because a company has a tightly defined vision and does not design its product by committee it doesn't mean the company does not 'listen' to its customers. I think you are romanticizing the non-compromising single mindedness of Apple (and Ferrari). I guarantee you they both listen very carefully to their customers.
They make great stuff that make people drool. If that's "not listening", fine by me. I won't say a damn thing, just keep the good stuff coming.
Apple is not known to do things by focus groups anyway. I think SJ or someone else in the organization admitted to this in the past. Either way is fine by me. Their method, whatever it is, has worked for over a decade now. I don't really mind if they keep it up.
Devices like the iPhone, iPod Touch (and now the iPod nano screen) use tempered optical glass, which has a Mohs hardness scale rating of 7-8, which puts it into the same class as quartz, but below Topaz, and of course diamond. Regular glass is down around 3-5 Mohs, mild steel is usually around 4-5 Mohs and hardened (carbonized) steel is around 7-8 Mohs. So for the screen to scratch you had to have it come into contact with something that was higher on the Mohs scale than the screen. Usually that's a diamond ring, an emery board, or some kind of mineral or other. I repeatedly take out my small pocket knife which has stainless steel fittings and rub it back and forth across my 1st gen screen to show how tough the screen is. NOTE: do not do this to your later models with the oleophobic coating - for some reason the coating makes the scratches more obvious than on the plain glass of the 1st gen..
Most keys are made out of a form of brass - which is lower on the Mohs scale than steel, so it categorically wasn't the keys that scratched the screen. It could have been the steel in the keyring, or something else, but most definitely not the keys.
I do have a friend who is one of those folks who insists on squeezing the phone with her shoulder against her ear, which is ok - except she wears diamond earrings, which put a series of small but visible scratches in her screen. I recommended she put a film on to put a sacrificial layer between the diamond and the glass. Since the plastic film is resilient and therefore less prone to scratching by the diamonds, it works fine.
So if you get sand in your pocket, drop it outside where there is a wide mix of minerals to contact - chances are good you will find something that will scratch the screen if you don't keep it clean and debris-free.
As for drinking the koolaid, try this on for size. Apple gets to decide what they think is best for their products and what third party products they want in their stores. You as a consumer get to decide what is best for your use of that product - but that doesn't mean that Apple has to meet your every whim or expectation simply because you want something that they choose to not stock in their stores. Seriously. What a ridiculous response.
Thanks for that informative and well reasoned posting.
Let us start with two fundamental assumptions. First assumption: Anything that can scratch glass much necessarily be harder than glass. Fair enough?
Second assumption: Mere contact between glass and something harder than glass is insufficient to create a scratch. There must be some minimal amount of pressure applied, along with a force parallel to the surface of the glass. In other words, you have to push the things together and slide. Common sense, yeah?
Now. Imagine that you have a piece of the same optical glass used in iPhone screens, and also something hard enough to scratch it. Since optical glass has a Mohs hardness of six-and-a-half-ish, we're looking for something with a hardness of seven or more. Just to be on the safe side, let's go with tungsten carbide. That's ridiculously hard, with a Mohs rating of 9.
Now apply the tungsten carbide drill bit to the glass. Apply sufficient parallel and perpendicular forces to make a scratch. Write down the values of the parallel and perpendicular force components in your copybook.
Now apply one of these plasticky sheety things to the glass. Apply the drill bit again, using the same force we used before.
What happens? By gosh and by gum, the drill bit went right through the plastic like it wasn't even there. Seems like the plastic did absolutely no good whatsoever. Because, see, an object hard enough to scratch glass, applied with sufficient force to scratch glass, isn't going to be all that impressed by a piece of sellotape.
Unfortunately, this mental exercise didn't hold up for me. I tried it, tungsten carbide and aluminum oxide both scratch the glass at much less pressure than is required to penetrate a thin piece of clear plastic.
Unfortunately, this mental exercise didn't hold up for me. I tried it, tungsten carbide and aluminum oxide both scratch the glass at much less pressure than is required to penetrate a thin piece of clear plastic.
If you really did try it, then respect, man. Mad respect.
If you really did try it, then respect, man. Mad respect.
Only on the edges, the black face, I can't risk ruining the main display just yet, but it's an original 3G, probably going to be replace by whatever follows the 3GS this summer.
The scratches weren't deep though by themselves, but if scuffs built up over time, then it might add up. For what it's worth, I don't use plastic screen protectors, the problem had nothing to do with the protection, but being too easy to peel. And the main issue about Apple no longer offering them, that's fine, anyone that decides they must have it can still get them from any number of store chains and web sites.
I might play with other materials, maybe a bit of soil, which may hold hard grains that might be found in a pocket.
My first touch did not have a screen protector and lasted for a while
My current touch is pretty scratched up, and I had to buy a protector in order to prevent an increase in scratches. Thank god apple does not control the protector market for their devices or i would have been screwed.
For those who are saying that the screens don't need protecting, they do. Besides some people buy anti glare so they can read their screen if they happen to venture outside. Not sure why apple would want to remove it from their stores, but I have a hunch people will keep buying screen protectors from other places.
Only on the edges, the black face, I can't risk ruining the main display just yet, but it's an original 3G, probably going to be replace by whatever follows the 3GS this summer.
The scratches weren't deep though by themselves, but if scuffs built up over time, then it might add up. For what it's worth, I don't use plastic screen protectors, the problem had nothing to do with the protection, but being too easy to peel. And the main issue about Apple no longer offering them, that's fine, anyone that decides they must have it can still get them from any number of store chains and web sites.
I might play with other materials, maybe a bit of soil, which may hold hard grains that might be found in a pocket.
this despite widespread reports of scratches appearing quite easily on its handheld offerings for years.
Apple device screens are among the most durable and scratch-resistant you'll ever find. There's no actual need for any screen protection.
As for the ban, screen protection kind of defeats the purpose of oleophobic coatings, and does send the message that Apple's screens are in need of protection.
I've stopped using plastic screen protectors for my iPhone long ago, preferring a nice, thin, plastic/transparent backing. Works great.
Further, you can get your screen protectors elsewhere, just not in Apple Stores. No big deal.
The other big factor that no one has mentioned is that these screen protectors interfere with multi-touch. So they could be leading to greater support costs for Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman
Are Apple 'banning' the screen covers or are they no longer stocking / selling them? If it is the latter I would assume it is just a business decision.
It is the latter. Apple isn't banning anything - just not selling them in their stores. I don't see what all the whining is about.
They do need. iPod Touch doesn't have any oleophobic coating
not at the moment, but perhaps the next gen will.
From what I've seen of the report, this news is coming from smaller companies. not from say Power Support who provides like 80% of the items in question. So this leak could be nothing more than bitterness by folks that wanted their stuff sold in stores but Apple said no. perhaps due to quality issues, or an exclusive contract with Power Support or perhaps they are cutting the items due to other issues like wanting to use that space for something that will get them more profit. Heck I was in one of my locals today and wondering where the heck they were going to put all the ipad stuff. they are going to have to cut back something if they plan to floor anything, even their own stuff
Quote:
Originally Posted by Motlee
IMO, this ban is due to iPod/iPhone replacements/repairs done by Apple under warranty.
You put that film on there and then need a repair done where Apple ends up replacing the device, then you have a consumer trying to get Apple to replace his/her protective film as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogcow
This may be because when people buy these they made the employees put them on. If the employee messes up who's responsible?
Probably not the reasons, but yes they are added benefits.
Quote:
Originally Posted by popnfresh
More and more, Apple seems to be ignoring what people want in favor of what Steve Jobs is convinced they should want--Flash on the iPhone/Touch/iPad, user-replaceable batteries, support for more audio and video codecs. And now this.
More like some folks have a knee jerk reaction to anything that isn't how they would do it.
Flash is not compatible with touch screens. Even Adobe admits this. Not to mention the ungoing crashing etc with Flash and the Mac OS (which the phone os is based on)
removing the housing that makes batteries removable allows for larger batteries and honestly how much trouble is it to go every 3-5 years to have your battery replaced at the same cost you were spending every 12-14 months
and so on
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox
"Won't accept Diner's Club cards for purchases?"
Actually for a while very few US companies did. because the transaction fees were insanely high. Now that DC is owned by Mastercard, there's no issue
THE non-glare Power support is absolutely essential when viewing outdoors and the screen is actually more responsive via touch with it on. This just seems like part of Apple's infamous planned obsolescence- like when they used to push older iPods as gym and running companions knowing full well how easily those hard drives would break. They don't make all that money with a 10% market share unless it has turnover upon turnover.
This is really sad as Power Support would have made a ton of money off iPad screen protector sales.
Bottom line, Apple does not want people placing anything on their iPads that could possibly affect the precision and respsonsiveness of its new Multi-Touch screen.
Quote:
Multi-Touch
The Multi-Touch screen on iPad is based on the same revolutionary technology on iPhone. But the technology has been completely reengineered for the larger iPad surface, making it extremely precise and responsive. So whether you?re zooming in on a map, flicking through your photos, or deleting an email, iPad responds with incredible accuracy. And it does just what you want it to. http://www.apple.com/ipad/design/
Dropping things that have a glass surface is a bad idea anyway. The solution is not the screen protector, but rather, not dropping your iPhone (d'oh!) in first place.
So clean up your mess and send the iPhone in for repairs. Or pay $20 for the sheet and send your iPhone in for repairs.
Bottom line, Apple does not want people placing anything on their iPads that could possibly affect the precision and respsonsiveness of its new Multi-Touch screen.
NO. But I see you're still protecting anything Apple says you should or shouldn't do like some poor submissive fanboy on a chain. Rather sad that others can't have a reasonable discussion on here without your constant, obnoxious, incessant cheerleading
Comments
Your ignorance is blatant. Apple has never "listened" to their customers. Neither does Ferrari.
They just make what they think are really, really awesome products. If you don't like them; just move on to something you do like. It's that simple, and it always has been.
It's laughable you don't realize this.
That is ridiculous. Just because a company has a tightly defined vision and does not design its product by committee it doesn't mean the company does not 'listen' to its customers. I think you are romanticizing the non-compromising single mindedness of Apple (and Ferrari). I guarantee you they both listen very carefully to their customers.
Dropping things that have a glass surface is a bad idea anyway.
Assuming people chose to drop expensive electronics. I'm not sure how you're going to find people that do that.
They make great stuff that make people drool. If that's "not listening", fine by me. I won't say a damn thing, just keep the good stuff coming.
Apple is not known to do things by focus groups anyway. I think SJ or someone else in the organization admitted to this in the past. Either way is fine by me. Their method, whatever it is, has worked for over a decade now. I don't really mind if they keep it up.
Assuming people chose to drop expensive electronics. I'm not sure how you're going to find people that do that.
I think it's safe to assume that these things get dropped by accident.
In that case, you might just be SOL. Nothing you can do about that. Bad karma or something . . .
Devices like the iPhone, iPod Touch (and now the iPod nano screen) use tempered optical glass, which has a Mohs hardness scale rating of 7-8, which puts it into the same class as quartz, but below Topaz, and of course diamond. Regular glass is down around 3-5 Mohs, mild steel is usually around 4-5 Mohs and hardened (carbonized) steel is around 7-8 Mohs. So for the screen to scratch you had to have it come into contact with something that was higher on the Mohs scale than the screen. Usually that's a diamond ring, an emery board, or some kind of mineral or other. I repeatedly take out my small pocket knife which has stainless steel fittings and rub it back and forth across my 1st gen screen to show how tough the screen is. NOTE: do not do this to your later models with the oleophobic coating - for some reason the coating makes the scratches more obvious than on the plain glass of the 1st gen..
Most keys are made out of a form of brass - which is lower on the Mohs scale than steel, so it categorically wasn't the keys that scratched the screen. It could have been the steel in the keyring, or something else, but most definitely not the keys.
I do have a friend who is one of those folks who insists on squeezing the phone with her shoulder against her ear, which is ok - except she wears diamond earrings, which put a series of small but visible scratches in her screen. I recommended she put a film on to put a sacrificial layer between the diamond and the glass. Since the plastic film is resilient and therefore less prone to scratching by the diamonds, it works fine.
So if you get sand in your pocket, drop it outside where there is a wide mix of minerals to contact - chances are good you will find something that will scratch the screen if you don't keep it clean and debris-free.
As for drinking the koolaid, try this on for size. Apple gets to decide what they think is best for their products and what third party products they want in their stores. You as a consumer get to decide what is best for your use of that product - but that doesn't mean that Apple has to meet your every whim or expectation simply because you want something that they choose to not stock in their stores. Seriously. What a ridiculous response.
Thanks for that informative and well reasoned posting.
Okie doke, I'll give it a shot.
Let us start with two fundamental assumptions. First assumption: Anything that can scratch glass much necessarily be harder than glass. Fair enough?
Second assumption: Mere contact between glass and something harder than glass is insufficient to create a scratch. There must be some minimal amount of pressure applied, along with a force parallel to the surface of the glass. In other words, you have to push the things together and slide. Common sense, yeah?
Now. Imagine that you have a piece of the same optical glass used in iPhone screens, and also something hard enough to scratch it. Since optical glass has a Mohs hardness of six-and-a-half-ish, we're looking for something with a hardness of seven or more. Just to be on the safe side, let's go with tungsten carbide. That's ridiculously hard, with a Mohs rating of 9.
Now apply the tungsten carbide drill bit to the glass. Apply sufficient parallel and perpendicular forces to make a scratch. Write down the values of the parallel and perpendicular force components in your copybook.
Now apply one of these plasticky sheety things to the glass. Apply the drill bit again, using the same force we used before.
What happens? By gosh and by gum, the drill bit went right through the plastic like it wasn't even there. Seems like the plastic did absolutely no good whatsoever. Because, see, an object hard enough to scratch glass, applied with sufficient force to scratch glass, isn't going to be all that impressed by a piece of sellotape.
Unfortunately, this mental exercise didn't hold up for me. I tried it, tungsten carbide and aluminum oxide both scratch the glass at much less pressure than is required to penetrate a thin piece of clear plastic.
Unfortunately, this mental exercise didn't hold up for me. I tried it, tungsten carbide and aluminum oxide both scratch the glass at much less pressure than is required to penetrate a thin piece of clear plastic.
If you really did try it, then respect, man. Mad respect.
If you really did try it, then respect, man. Mad respect.
Only on the edges, the black face, I can't risk ruining the main display just yet, but it's an original 3G, probably going to be replace by whatever follows the 3GS this summer.
The scratches weren't deep though by themselves, but if scuffs built up over time, then it might add up. For what it's worth, I don't use plastic screen protectors, the problem had nothing to do with the protection, but being too easy to peel. And the main issue about Apple no longer offering them, that's fine, anyone that decides they must have it can still get them from any number of store chains and web sites.
I might play with other materials, maybe a bit of soil, which may hold hard grains that might be found in a pocket.
My current touch is pretty scratched up, and I had to buy a protector in order to prevent an increase in scratches. Thank god apple does not control the protector market for their devices or i would have been screwed.
For those who are saying that the screens don't need protecting, they do. Besides some people buy anti glare so they can read their screen if they happen to venture outside. Not sure why apple would want to remove it from their stores, but I have a hunch people will keep buying screen protectors from other places.
Only on the edges, the black face, I can't risk ruining the main display just yet, but it's an original 3G, probably going to be replace by whatever follows the 3GS this summer.
The scratches weren't deep though by themselves, but if scuffs built up over time, then it might add up. For what it's worth, I don't use plastic screen protectors, the problem had nothing to do with the protection, but being too easy to peel. And the main issue about Apple no longer offering them, that's fine, anyone that decides they must have it can still get them from any number of store chains and web sites.
I might play with other materials, maybe a bit of soil, which may hold hard grains that might be found in a pocket.
Very interesting. Ballsy.
this despite widespread reports of scratches appearing quite easily on its handheld offerings for years.
Apple device screens are among the most durable and scratch-resistant you'll ever find. There's no actual need for any screen protection.
As for the ban, screen protection kind of defeats the purpose of oleophobic coatings, and does send the message that Apple's screens are in need of protection.
I've stopped using plastic screen protectors for my iPhone long ago, preferring a nice, thin, plastic/transparent backing. Works great.
Further, you can get your screen protectors elsewhere, just not in Apple Stores. No big deal.
The other big factor that no one has mentioned is that these screen protectors interfere with multi-touch. So they could be leading to greater support costs for Apple.
Are Apple 'banning' the screen covers or are they no longer stocking / selling them? If it is the latter I would assume it is just a business decision.
It is the latter. Apple isn't banning anything - just not selling them in their stores. I don't see what all the whining is about.
They do need. iPod Touch doesn't have any oleophobic coating
not at the moment, but perhaps the next gen will.
From what I've seen of the report, this news is coming from smaller companies. not from say Power Support who provides like 80% of the items in question. So this leak could be nothing more than bitterness by folks that wanted their stuff sold in stores but Apple said no. perhaps due to quality issues, or an exclusive contract with Power Support or perhaps they are cutting the items due to other issues like wanting to use that space for something that will get them more profit. Heck I was in one of my locals today and wondering where the heck they were going to put all the ipad stuff. they are going to have to cut back something if they plan to floor anything, even their own stuff
IMO, this ban is due to iPod/iPhone replacements/repairs done by Apple under warranty.
You put that film on there and then need a repair done where Apple ends up replacing the device, then you have a consumer trying to get Apple to replace his/her protective film as well.
This may be because when people buy these they made the employees put them on. If the employee messes up who's responsible?
Probably not the reasons, but yes they are added benefits.
More and more, Apple seems to be ignoring what people want in favor of what Steve Jobs is convinced they should want--Flash on the iPhone/Touch/iPad, user-replaceable batteries, support for more audio and video codecs. And now this.
More like some folks have a knee jerk reaction to anything that isn't how they would do it.
Flash is not compatible with touch screens. Even Adobe admits this. Not to mention the ungoing crashing etc with Flash and the Mac OS (which the phone os is based on)
removing the housing that makes batteries removable allows for larger batteries and honestly how much trouble is it to go every 3-5 years to have your battery replaced at the same cost you were spending every 12-14 months
and so on
"Won't accept Diner's Club cards for purchases?"
Actually for a while very few US companies did. because the transaction fees were insanely high. Now that DC is owned by Mastercard, there's no issue
This is really sad as Power Support would have made a ton of money off iPad screen protector sales.
Not nice Apple.
Multi-Touch
The Multi-Touch screen on iPad is based on the same revolutionary technology on iPhone. But the technology has been completely reengineered for the larger iPad surface, making it extremely precise and responsive. So whether you?re zooming in on a map, flicking through your photos, or deleting an email, iPad responds with incredible accuracy. And it does just what you want it to. http://www.apple.com/ipad/design/
And has been evidenced on other touch-screen devices, e.g., http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcfcqeVGsfE
Dropping things that have a glass surface is a bad idea anyway. The solution is not the screen protector, but rather, not dropping your iPhone (d'oh!) in first place.
So clean up your mess and send the iPhone in for repairs. Or pay $20 for the sheet and send your iPhone in for repairs.
I'll save my $20 for some neat-o apps, thank you.
Accidents happen.
Bottom line, Apple does not want people placing anything on their iPads that could possibly affect the precision and respsonsiveness of its new Multi-Touch screen.
And has been evidenced on other touch-screen devices, e.g., http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcfcqeVGsfE
Steve Jobs only wants you to use it RAW?
Steve Jobs only wants you to use it RAW?
Another of your alts?
Another of your alts?
NO. But I see you're still protecting anything Apple says you should or shouldn't do like some poor submissive fanboy on a chain. Rather sad that others can't have a reasonable discussion on here without your constant, obnoxious, incessant cheerleading
I've never had one on my 1st Gen iPod Touch. Just checked again and there are NO SCRATCHES on the screen.
Might wanna do a test review next time, before swallowing rumors from accessory manufacturers.
Very odd to suggest screens on a *tempered glass* screen "scratch easily." Have you tried no screen protector yet?
I've never had one on my 1st Gen iPod Touch. Just checked again and there are NO SCRATCHES on the screen.
Might wanna do a test review next time, before swallowing rumors from accessory manufacturers.
Many of us use them primarily to avoid GLARE. Scratch resistance is an added feature- that's all.