I doubt they are already using it. This will probably be introduced into their new iPod line this fall and possibly into the iPad 2 (whose material we are uncertain about).
Actually...
Key word there being "prevent" not reduce. True, it may not be completely preventable, but it may be nigh scratch-proof.
As we know, Aluminum is anodized. It's a very hard coating which can be damaged because the substrate is soft.
Nothing is scratch proof, including diamond. Most SS is fairly soft, though much harder than plain aluminum. This will make it much harder. Though, being a thin layer, it can still be broken through with something sharp.
You'd want a lot of baths / baths able to take many units. 90 would only give you 1 unit per minute, 1440 a day, 10,080 a week (given a 24hr production line) for 524,000 a year.
If you roll out 25mil iPads, not including other product lines that is 4300 ish baths going flat out not including moving units in and out or refreshing said baths.
That is also a lot of material and energy to consider. The volumes are enormous.
I'm not saying impossible or anything. I just find the volume of materials being processed and the logistics really interesting.
It's not a big deal. Industry does this in volume. One bath might hold a hundred or more at once. They might have one, ten, or fifty baths in a plant.
Exhaust systems are generally not under any load or stress. Stainless steel is also great for high heat applications but not so great in applications that involve lateral loads as anyone that has ever broke the tip off a knife will tell you. In a static object that will not get dropped from very high or twisted under any torque like a phone or laptop stainless steel will probably be fine.
Stainless is not brittle by default. If you use, say, a 440 alloy for making knives, and you harden it sufficiently, then, as all hardened metals, it becomes more brittle. But otherwise, it's not.
Personally I would like Apple to use tungsten carbide. Aside from the weight issue, it's a very tough metal (not indestructible though). I've tried scratching my tungsten ring with concrete, high speed steel, anodized aluminum... no scratches at all thus far. I do take my ring off when working with diamond abrasives though
Personally I would like Apple to use tungsten carbide. Aside from the weight issue, it's a very tough metal (not indestructible though). I've tried scratching my tungsten ring with concrete, high speed steel, anodized aluminum... no scratches at all thus far. I do take my ring off when working with diamond abrasives though
On the other hand, tungsten carbide IS brittle. It's very hard, and very stiff. But, a good smack, and it shatters. My tungsten carbide milling bits break the cutting edges on the slightest provocation. Everything must be just right . HSS is much more forgiving.
As we know, Aluminum is anodized. It's a very hard coating which can be damaged because the substrate is soft.
Nothing is scratch proof, including diamond. Most SS is fairly soft, though much harder than plain aluminum. This will make it much harder. Though, being a thin layer, it can still be broken through with something sharp.
Unobtanium. It is so dense, you could throw it into a black hole and it would resist scratching.
I was under the impression Apple was going to employ LM instead of SS in their small electronics.
Maybe the iPhone 5 "band" and iPod enclosures will be nitride-coated stainless steel, and the MacBook lines will switch to Liquid Metal unibody enclosures. The iPhone and iPod internal structures are relatively simple compared to the MacBooks. Machining all that complexity into a billet of aluminum alloy for each and every MacBook is time-consuming. And time is money in manufacturing. Supposedly Liquid Metal would allow a faster injection-molding-like technique.
Also, just as a silly wild-ass guess, I'd say that Liquid Metal enclosures could allow Apple to use polished as well as matte finishes on future MacBooks. As rugged as the current aluminum unibody MacBooks are, the aluminum surface is still relatively easy to scratch. I think that's one reason why they are all currently matte-finish. To minimize the visibility of surface scratches (and of course to minimize the visibility of fingerprints.)
But if Liquid Metal is as scratch-resistant as Apple claims, it would be possible to use highly polished surfaces on MacBooks or other devices with Liquid Metal enclosures. Not sure how Apple could solve the cosmetic issue of hundreds of greasy fingerprints on shiny metal though.
Another silly idea: instead of a white plastic Apple logo on MacBook lids, Apple could use the same micro-perforated metal technique they use for the sleep indicator. The metal itself would appear to glow when the MacBook is on. And to make the Apple logo visible when the MacBook is off, it could have a different finish than the rest of the enclosure. Matte if the MacBook is polished, polished if the MacBook is matte. Voila. The last vestige of white plastic in Apple computer enclosures would be gone.
Austenitic Stainless is a high quality stainless steel and is non-magnetic.
Ferritic and Martensitic (this is the more brittle one) stainless steels are magnetic and are used for different applications due to their unique properties.
Take a magnet with you the next time you buy a new kitchen sink and ask if it is high quality stainless or not. You can now test on the spot...
I really wonder how defensible this patent is. This seems like a rather normal materials engineering process. I'd bet that there's a lot of aerospace and/or automotive companies that might use similar treatments for certain parts.
It's of course a great way to improve durability. But a patent for the process seems rather sketchy to me.
I really wonder how defensible this patent is. This seems like a rather normal materials engineering process. I'd bet that there's a lot of aerospace and/or automotive companies that might use similar treatments for certain parts.
It's of course a great way to improve durability. But a patent for the process seems rather sketchy to me.
Im a Mechanical Eng. Nitriding is not exotic (even some stainless derivitive, with some tweaked alloying elements), this should not have been granted a patent.
Im a Mechanical Eng. Nitriding is not exotic (even some stainless derivitive, with some tweaked alloying elements), this should not have been granted a patent.
You are exactly correct that this patent was, in the parlance, "improvidently awarded".
Everything imaginable has been nitrided from aircraft propellers to diesel crankshafts and a lot of things in between. This is nothing new and nothing but hype anyway.
I don't see what's wrong with Stainless Steel, as-is. The beauty of use has its own aesthetic, and is not something that has to be, or even should be, avoided. The back of my old 1st-gen ipod touch is a network of scratches. It's broken-in, comfortable, and quite beautiful.
"Looking like new" isn't the highest aesthetic. What's the first thing you did with a new pair of sneakers as a kid?
Comments
Stainless steel is generally brittle but I guess for a phone or computer it would be ok.
SS isn't brittle. Where do you get that idea?
Scratch RESISTANT, not scratch PROOF!
Scratch RESISTANT, not scratch PROOF!
Correct!
I doubt they are already using it. This will probably be introduced into their new iPod line this fall and possibly into the iPad 2 (whose material we are uncertain about).
Actually...
Key word there being "prevent" not reduce. True, it may not be completely preventable, but it may be nigh scratch-proof.
As we know, Aluminum is anodized. It's a very hard coating which can be damaged because the substrate is soft.
Nothing is scratch proof, including diamond. Most SS is fairly soft, though much harder than plain aluminum. This will make it much harder. Though, being a thin layer, it can still be broken through with something sharp.
Er... Yes, it is.
It depends on the alloy. There are magnetic alloys, and non magnetic alloys. Look them up.
90min for each casing in a bath.
You'd want a lot of baths / baths able to take many units. 90 would only give you 1 unit per minute, 1440 a day, 10,080 a week (given a 24hr production line) for 524,000 a year.
If you roll out 25mil iPads, not including other product lines that is 4300 ish baths going flat out not including moving units in and out or refreshing said baths.
That is also a lot of material and energy to consider. The volumes are enormous.
I'm not saying impossible or anything. I just find the volume of materials being processed and the logistics really interesting.
It's not a big deal. Industry does this in volume. One bath might hold a hundred or more at once. They might have one, ten, or fifty baths in a plant.
Exhaust systems are generally not under any load or stress. Stainless steel is also great for high heat applications but not so great in applications that involve lateral loads as anyone that has ever broke the tip off a knife will tell you. In a static object that will not get dropped from very high or twisted under any torque like a phone or laptop stainless steel will probably be fine.
Stainless is not brittle by default. If you use, say, a 440 alloy for making knives, and you harden it sufficiently, then, as all hardened metals, it becomes more brittle. But otherwise, it's not.
Personally I would like Apple to use tungsten carbide. Aside from the weight issue, it's a very tough metal (not indestructible though). I've tried scratching my tungsten ring with concrete, high speed steel, anodized aluminum... no scratches at all thus far. I do take my ring off when working with diamond abrasives though
On the other hand, tungsten carbide IS brittle. It's very hard, and very stiff. But, a good smack, and it shatters. My tungsten carbide milling bits break the cutting edges on the slightest provocation. Everything must be just right . HSS is much more forgiving.
Thats only cuz you're not the sharpest tool in the shed
Ha ha ha ... Funny Guy, eh ?
But yes, will admit
Sharp or otherwise
I ain't no "tool"
.
Now ...
If you're maybe able to "penetrate"
Please let me know if find ANYthing in there ?
Good Luck
.
Does it insulate antennas...?
Consumer Reports insulates antennas.
As we know, Aluminum is anodized. It's a very hard coating which can be damaged because the substrate is soft.
Nothing is scratch proof, including diamond. Most SS is fairly soft, though much harder than plain aluminum. This will make it much harder. Though, being a thin layer, it can still be broken through with something sharp.
Unobtanium. It is so dense, you could throw it into a black hole and it would resist scratching.
I was under the impression Apple was going to employ LM instead of SS in their small electronics.
Maybe the iPhone 5 "band" and iPod enclosures will be nitride-coated stainless steel, and the MacBook lines will switch to Liquid Metal unibody enclosures. The iPhone and iPod internal structures are relatively simple compared to the MacBooks. Machining all that complexity into a billet of aluminum alloy for each and every MacBook is time-consuming. And time is money in manufacturing. Supposedly Liquid Metal would allow a faster injection-molding-like technique.
Also, just as a silly wild-ass guess, I'd say that Liquid Metal enclosures could allow Apple to use polished as well as matte finishes on future MacBooks. As rugged as the current aluminum unibody MacBooks are, the aluminum surface is still relatively easy to scratch. I think that's one reason why they are all currently matte-finish. To minimize the visibility of surface scratches (and of course to minimize the visibility of fingerprints.)
But if Liquid Metal is as scratch-resistant as Apple claims, it would be possible to use highly polished surfaces on MacBooks or other devices with Liquid Metal enclosures. Not sure how Apple could solve the cosmetic issue of hundreds of greasy fingerprints on shiny metal though.
Another silly idea: instead of a white plastic Apple logo on MacBook lids, Apple could use the same micro-perforated metal technique they use for the sleep indicator. The metal itself would appear to glow when the MacBook is on. And to make the Apple logo visible when the MacBook is off, it could have a different finish than the rest of the enclosure. Matte if the MacBook is polished, polished if the MacBook is matte. Voila. The last vestige of white plastic in Apple computer enclosures would be gone.
Er... Yes, it is.
Austenitic Stainless is a high quality stainless steel and is non-magnetic.
Ferritic and Martensitic (this is the more brittle one) stainless steels are magnetic and are used for different applications due to their unique properties.
Take a magnet with you the next time you buy a new kitchen sink and ask if it is high quality stainless or not. You can now test on the spot...
Tom
It's of course a great way to improve durability. But a patent for the process seems rather sketchy to me.
.
Yea yea, all very interesting
But know something that's impossible to penetrate
My ex's thick skull
.
(and hope it never gets patented)
best on the boards, kicked her wasteful arse to the DOOR...you made my day
i'm still laughing
oh and guess what....she hated macs...reason right there
It's of course a great way to improve durability. But a patent for the process seems rather sketchy to me.
Im a Mechanical Eng. Nitriding is not exotic (even some stainless derivitive, with some tweaked alloying elements), this should not have been granted a patent.
You are exactly correct that this patent was, in the parlance, "improvidently awarded".
Everything imaginable has been nitrided from aircraft propellers to diesel crankshafts and a lot of things in between. This is nothing new and nothing but hype anyway.
"Looking like new" isn't the highest aesthetic. What's the first thing you did with a new pair of sneakers as a kid?