We would still be using plastic computers right now if it were not for Apple pushing the boundaries.
You mean metal ones.
Everybody made hulking metal behemoths with no regard for weight or aesthetics until the plastic Apple ][ was released. Then everyone made plastic laptops (and? continued to make metal desktops for whatever stupid reason). THEN Apple discovered how to make computers out of one piece of metal, and boom, the unibody was born.
While true, pounds can also be used as a unit of mass. It is of couse related to pounds (force) by the gavity at the earth's surface in english units ie. lb(f) = lb(m) x 32ft/sec^2.
I pretty much have zero faith in the mainstream media to get technical details correct, so im not surprised that they messed up the units of presssure.
You have zero faith in the mainstream media, but you'll accept Wikipedia as a source?
Pound is traditionally defined as a measure of weight. Weight is force, not mass (That is, it is the downward force on an object caused by gravity). The confusion is caused by the fact that normal experience is that all of us experience 1 G acceleration due to gravity, so force and mass are considered equivalent when it comes to 'weight'.
You have zero faith in the mainstream media, but you'll accept Wikipedia as a source?
Pound is traditionally defined as a measure of weight. Weight is force, not mass (That is, it is the downward force on an object caused by gravity). The confusion is caused by the fact that normal experience is that all of us experience 1 G acceleration due to gravity, so force and mass are considered equivalent when it comes to 'weight'.
Wikipedia is correct on this one. As it usually is on scientific issues, since the articles are mostly written by fairly knowledgeable authors - unlike most media journalists.
You have zero faith in the mainstream media, but you'll accept Wikipedia as a source?
Pound is traditionally defined as a measure of weight. Weight is force, not mass (That is, it is the downward force on an object caused by gravity). The confusion is caused by the fact that normal experience is that all of us experience 1 G acceleration due to gravity, so force and mass are considered equivalent when it comes to 'weight'.
Right, all im saying is pounds CAN be used as a unit of mass. Usually it is clarified by refering to pounds-mass and pounds-force specifically.
And yes, i put more faith in wikipedia than engadget.
Already posted this in another thread, but more relevant here, Titbit from the biography:
"Next was glass. “After we did metal, I looked at Jony and said that we had to master glass,” said Jobs. For the Apple stores, they had created huge windowpanes and glass stairs. For the iPhone, the original plan was for it to have a plastic screen, like the iPod. But Jobs decided it would feel much more elegant and substantive if the screens were glass. So he set about finding a glass that would be strong and resistant to scratches.
The natural place to look was Asia, where the glass for the stores was being made. But Jobs’s friend John Seeley Brown, who was on the board of Corning Glass in Upstate New York, told him that he should talk to that company’s young and dynamic CEO, Wendell Weeks. So he dialed the main Corning switchboard number and asked to be put through to Weeks. He got an assistant, who offered to pass along the message. “No, I’m Steve Jobs,” he replied. “Put me through.” The assistant refused. Jobs called Brown and complained that he had been subjected to “typical East Coast bullshit.” When Weeks heard that, he called the main Apple switchboard and asked to speak to Jobs. He was told to put his request in writing and send it in by fax. When Jobs was told what happened, he took a liking to Weeks and invited him to Cupertino.
Jobs described the type of glass Apple wanted for the iPhone, and Weeks told him that Corning had developed a chemical exchange process in the 1960s that led to what they dubbed “gorilla glass.” It was incredibly strong, but it had never found a market, so Corning quit making it. Jobs said he doubted it was good enough, and he started explaining to Weeks how glass was made. This amused Weeks, who of course knew more than Jobs about that topic. “Can you shut up,” Weeks interjected, “and let me teach you some science?” Jobs was taken aback and fell silent. Weeks went to the whiteboard and gave a tutorial on the chemistry, which involved an ion-exchange process that produced a compression layer on the surface of the glass. This turned Jobs around, and he said he wanted as much gorilla glass as Corning could make within six months. “We don’t have the capacity,” Weeks replied. “None of our plants make the glass now.”incredibly strong, but it had never found a market, so Corning quit making it. Jobs said he doubted it was good enough, and he started explaining to Weeks how glass was made. This amused Weeks, who of course knew more than Jobs about that topic. “Can you shut up,” Weeks interjected, “and let me teach you some science?” Jobs was taken aback and fell silent. Weeks went to the whiteboard and gave a tutorial on the chemistry, which involved an ion-exchange process that produced a compression layer on the surface of the glass. This turned Jobs around, and he said he wanted as much gorilla glass as Corning could make within six months. “We don’t have the capacity,” Weeks replied. “None of our plants make the glass now.”
“Don’t be afraid,” Jobs replied. This stunned Weeks, who was good-humored and confident but not used to Jobs’s reality distortion field. He tried to explain that a false sense of confidence would not overcome engineering challenges, but that was a premise that Jobs had repeatedly shown he didn’t accept. He stared at Weeks unblinking. “Yes, you can do it,” he said. “Get your mind around it. You can do it.”
As Weeks retold this story, he shook his head in astonishment. “We did it in under six months,” he said. “We produced a glass that had never been made.” Corning’s facility in Harrisburg, Kentucky, which had been making LCD displays, was converted almost overnight to make gorilla glass full-time. “We put our best scientists and engineers on it, and we just made it work.” In his airy office, Weeks has just one framed memento on display. It’s a message Jobs sent the day the iPhone came out: “We couldn’t have done it without you.”
Pounds are a unit of force, not pressure. Being able to withstand 121 pounds of force means absolutely nothing on it's own. How much is the force spread out? How far is it from the supports?
That being said, this looks very promising. I wonder if the 4S already uses it (or a variant) and that's one of the reasons why Apple kept their lips sealed?
That was my concern, too. It's an impressive accomplishment, but we shouldn't let the marketing of using force ignore how force is registered. Being glued to the other display components (something people are upset about because it means Apple forces you buy more components than you need) will help it disperse the energy and prevent shattering but it can surely still happen with a light object.
Right, all im saying is pounds CAN be used as a unit of mass. Usually it is clarified by refering to pounds-mass and pounds-force specifically.
And yes, i put more faith in wikipedia than engadget.
More particularly, in science and engineering, the use of pounds as a unit of force is generally clarified by specifying lbf, with lb used as a unit of mass.
If you are the one the brings an unused tech from a half century ago into existence, instantly becoming the largest customer for the tech before others jumped on your bandwagon you tend to get some additional benefits for making a company money.
That was my concern, too. It's an impressive accomplishment, but we shouldn't let the marketing of using force ignore how force is registered. Being glued to the other display components (something people are upset about because it means Apple forces you buy more components than you need) will help it disperse the energy and prevent shattering but it can surely still happen with a light object.
This is a quasi-static test of a particular configuration that tests a combination of shear and tensile strength. The onset of damage during an impact event is strongly affected by loading rate and pulse duration, so it is not representative of impact resistance.
Right, all im saying is pounds CAN be used as a unit of mass. Usually it is clarified by refering to pounds-mass and pounds-force specifically.
And yes, i put more faith in wikipedia than engadget.
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry
Wikipedia is correct on this one. As it usually is on scientific issues, since the articles are mostly written by fairly knowledgeable authors - unlike most media journalists.
Yet their article is inaccurate and incomplete.
I have a graduate degree in science and had plenty of graduate level classes. While we normally used metric units, of course, we also used English units. Pound was universally used as a FORCE and if we wanted to use it as a mass (although there was rarely any reason to do so), we would use 'pound-mass'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry
More particularly, in science and engineering, the use of pounds as a unit of force is generally clarified by specifying lbf, with lb used as a unit of mass.
Incorrect. Pound-force is the default. If you say simply 'pound', it means force. Anyone using 'pound' to mean mass is sloppy - and that sloppiness would never be tolerated in real science.
My iPhone 4 fell 3 feet from my pocket and the screen completely shattered. My iPhone 4S screen came in contact with my keys in my pocket and now has a permanent scratch across it. In real-world conditions Gorilla Glass is extremely fragile. All these claims of strength are a bunch of B.S.
Glass is not for everyone, some should stick with safer fisher-price plastic phone.
That was Steve's only weakness: when other people knew that he didn't know what he was talking about. Of course, going on to actually teach him the stuff makes you lose your leverage over him?
I have a graduate degree in science and had plenty of graduate level classes. While we normally used metric units, of course, we also used English units. Pound was universally used as a FORCE and if we wanted to use it as a mass (although there was rarely any reason to do so), we would use 'pound-mass'.
Incorrect. Pound-force is the default. If you say simply 'pound', it means force. Anyone using 'pound' to mean mass is sloppy - and that sloppiness would never be tolerated in real science.
Interesting; what field did you study? As a ChE, our usage of pounds was almost always pounds-mass, so i tend to assume that.
I have a graduate degree in science and had plenty of graduate level classes. While we normally used metric units, of course, we also used English units. Pound was universally used as a FORCE and if we wanted to use it as a mass (although there was rarely any reason to do so), we would use 'pound-mass'.
I'm sure that your qualifications are excellent, but are you quite sure that you want to use your graduate class experience as the definitive ruling on this? I'm curious - since mass is one of the fundamental quantities in physics - how come you rarely needed it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Incorrect. Pound-force is the default. If you say simply 'pound', it means force. Anyone using 'pound' to mean mass is sloppy - and that sloppiness would never be tolerated in real science.
OK - I guess we simply disagree on this point. When I review journal articles for publication, if SI, though preferred, is not used, I require lbf for force. I am unaware of any publishing format guidance that follows the opposite convention that you have used, but perhaps you can point to some? Alternatively, do you have a better source than Wikipedia to support your view on this?
Anyway - we are digging in the weeds of archaic unit systems that should have been abandoned years ago in favor of SI, and we are only arguing about notation conventions, rather than substantive issues of meaning or use, and we are getting rather off topic.
I am surprised Apple didn't make moves to restrict access for competing companies.
My recollection was it was out of patent protection, having been invented in the late 60's. No sense making an exclusive deal with a manufacturer if someone else can duplicate the process.
No, Newtons are a unit of force, grams are a unit of mass, and pounds are a bizarre anachronism of the British Imperial system of units, which for some reason the United States of America has decided to cling to (despite a fairly violent split from the British Empire from 1773 through about the next century).
<...>
^^This.
I usually tend to understand pound-mass when I say pound, much like majjo has pointed out. The reason for this is simple: when I buy a pound of apples at the market, I expect 453.59237 grams of apples, not 4.44822162 newtons of apples. How that is being measured is immaterial to me, as long as I'm not getting ripped off.
Comments
We would still be using plastic computers right now if it were not for Apple pushing the boundaries.
You mean metal ones.
Everybody made hulking metal behemoths with no regard for weight or aesthetics until the plastic Apple ][ was released. Then everyone made plastic laptops (and? continued to make metal desktops for whatever stupid reason). THEN Apple discovered how to make computers out of one piece of metal, and boom, the unibody was born.
The old thickness was 1.0mm (.039"), the new thickness is .8mm (.031").
Imagine how great it will be to have a phone that is .008" thinner in your pocket!
(For reference, a standard business card is about .012" thick.)
While true, pounds can also be used as a unit of mass. It is of couse related to pounds (force) by the gavity at the earth's surface in english units ie. lb(f) = lb(m) x 32ft/sec^2.
See: http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound_(mass)
I pretty much have zero faith in the mainstream media to get technical details correct, so im not surprised that they messed up the units of presssure.
You have zero faith in the mainstream media, but you'll accept Wikipedia as a source?
Pound is traditionally defined as a measure of weight. Weight is force, not mass (That is, it is the downward force on an object caused by gravity). The confusion is caused by the fact that normal experience is that all of us experience 1 G acceleration due to gravity, so force and mass are considered equivalent when it comes to 'weight'.
You have zero faith in the mainstream media, but you'll accept Wikipedia as a source?
Pound is traditionally defined as a measure of weight. Weight is force, not mass (That is, it is the downward force on an object caused by gravity). The confusion is caused by the fact that normal experience is that all of us experience 1 G acceleration due to gravity, so force and mass are considered equivalent when it comes to 'weight'.
Wikipedia is correct on this one. As it usually is on scientific issues, since the articles are mostly written by fairly knowledgeable authors - unlike most media journalists.
You have zero faith in the mainstream media, but you'll accept Wikipedia as a source?
Pound is traditionally defined as a measure of weight. Weight is force, not mass (That is, it is the downward force on an object caused by gravity). The confusion is caused by the fact that normal experience is that all of us experience 1 G acceleration due to gravity, so force and mass are considered equivalent when it comes to 'weight'.
Right, all im saying is pounds CAN be used as a unit of mass. Usually it is clarified by refering to pounds-mass and pounds-force specifically.
And yes, i put more faith in wikipedia than engadget.
"Next was glass. “After we did metal, I looked at Jony and said that we had to master glass,” said Jobs. For the Apple stores, they had created huge windowpanes and glass stairs. For the iPhone, the original plan was for it to have a plastic screen, like the iPod. But Jobs decided it would feel much more elegant and substantive if the screens were glass. So he set about finding a glass that would be strong and resistant to scratches.
The natural place to look was Asia, where the glass for the stores was being made. But Jobs’s friend John Seeley Brown, who was on the board of Corning Glass in Upstate New York, told him that he should talk to that company’s young and dynamic CEO, Wendell Weeks. So he dialed the main Corning switchboard number and asked to be put through to Weeks. He got an assistant, who offered to pass along the message. “No, I’m Steve Jobs,” he replied. “Put me through.” The assistant refused. Jobs called Brown and complained that he had been subjected to “typical East Coast bullshit.” When Weeks heard that, he called the main Apple switchboard and asked to speak to Jobs. He was told to put his request in writing and send it in by fax. When Jobs was told what happened, he took a liking to Weeks and invited him to Cupertino.
Jobs described the type of glass Apple wanted for the iPhone, and Weeks told him that Corning had developed a chemical exchange process in the 1960s that led to what they dubbed “gorilla glass.” It was incredibly strong, but it had never found a market, so Corning quit making it. Jobs said he doubted it was good enough, and he started explaining to Weeks how glass was made. This amused Weeks, who of course knew more than Jobs about that topic. “Can you shut up,” Weeks interjected, “and let me teach you some science?” Jobs was taken aback and fell silent. Weeks went to the whiteboard and gave a tutorial on the chemistry, which involved an ion-exchange process that produced a compression layer on the surface of the glass. This turned Jobs around, and he said he wanted as much gorilla glass as Corning could make within six months. “We don’t have the capacity,” Weeks replied. “None of our plants make the glass now.”incredibly strong, but it had never found a market, so Corning quit making it. Jobs said he doubted it was good enough, and he started explaining to Weeks how glass was made. This amused Weeks, who of course knew more than Jobs about that topic. “Can you shut up,” Weeks interjected, “and let me teach you some science?” Jobs was taken aback and fell silent. Weeks went to the whiteboard and gave a tutorial on the chemistry, which involved an ion-exchange process that produced a compression layer on the surface of the glass. This turned Jobs around, and he said he wanted as much gorilla glass as Corning could make within six months. “We don’t have the capacity,” Weeks replied. “None of our plants make the glass now.”
“Don’t be afraid,” Jobs replied. This stunned Weeks, who was good-humored and confident but not used to Jobs’s reality distortion field. He tried to explain that a false sense of confidence would not overcome engineering challenges, but that was a premise that Jobs had repeatedly shown he didn’t accept. He stared at Weeks unblinking. “Yes, you can do it,” he said. “Get your mind around it. You can do it.”
As Weeks retold this story, he shook his head in astonishment. “We did it in under six months,” he said. “We produced a glass that had never been made.” Corning’s facility in Harrisburg, Kentucky, which had been making LCD displays, was converted almost overnight to make gorilla glass full-time. “We put our best scientists and engineers on it, and we just made it work.” In his airy office, Weeks has just one framed memento on display. It’s a message Jobs sent the day the iPhone came out: “We couldn’t have done it without you.”
Yet another industry that Apple helped to remake.
Corning had no intention of commercializing Gorilla Glass until Apple asked them to. It's now $700 M a year.
Why does Corning not mention Apple as one of its customers ?
http://www.corninggorillaglass.com/featured-products
Pounds are a unit of force, not pressure. Being able to withstand 121 pounds of force means absolutely nothing on it's own. How much is the force spread out? How far is it from the supports?
That being said, this looks very promising. I wonder if the 4S already uses it (or a variant) and that's one of the reasons why Apple kept their lips sealed?
That was my concern, too. It's an impressive accomplishment, but we shouldn't let the marketing of using force ignore how force is registered. Being glued to the other display components (something people are upset about because it means Apple forces you buy more components than you need) will help it disperse the energy and prevent shattering but it can surely still happen with a light object.
Right, all im saying is pounds CAN be used as a unit of mass. Usually it is clarified by refering to pounds-mass and pounds-force specifically.
And yes, i put more faith in wikipedia than engadget.
More particularly, in science and engineering, the use of pounds as a unit of force is generally clarified by specifying lbf, with lb used as a unit of mass.
Why does Corning not mention Apple as one of its customers ?
http://www.corninggorillaglass.com/featured-products
Apple paid them extra not to?
If you are the one the brings an unused tech from a half century ago into existence, instantly becoming the largest customer for the tech before others jumped on your bandwagon you tend to get some additional benefits for making a company money.
That was my concern, too. It's an impressive accomplishment, but we shouldn't let the marketing of using force ignore how force is registered. Being glued to the other display components (something people are upset about because it means Apple forces you buy more components than you need) will help it disperse the energy and prevent shattering but it can surely still happen with a light object.
This is a quasi-static test of a particular configuration that tests a combination of shear and tensile strength. The onset of damage during an impact event is strongly affected by loading rate and pulse duration, so it is not representative of impact resistance.
Can you shut up,” Weeks interjected, “and let me teach you some science?” Jobs was taken aback and fell silent.
That's awesome.
Right, all im saying is pounds CAN be used as a unit of mass. Usually it is clarified by refering to pounds-mass and pounds-force specifically.
And yes, i put more faith in wikipedia than engadget.
Wikipedia is correct on this one. As it usually is on scientific issues, since the articles are mostly written by fairly knowledgeable authors - unlike most media journalists.
Yet their article is inaccurate and incomplete.
I have a graduate degree in science and had plenty of graduate level classes. While we normally used metric units, of course, we also used English units. Pound was universally used as a FORCE and if we wanted to use it as a mass (although there was rarely any reason to do so), we would use 'pound-mass'.
More particularly, in science and engineering, the use of pounds as a unit of force is generally clarified by specifying lbf, with lb used as a unit of mass.
Incorrect. Pound-force is the default. If you say simply 'pound', it means force. Anyone using 'pound' to mean mass is sloppy - and that sloppiness would never be tolerated in real science.
My iPhone 4 fell 3 feet from my pocket and the screen completely shattered. My iPhone 4S screen came in contact with my keys in my pocket and now has a permanent scratch across it. In real-world conditions Gorilla Glass is extremely fragile. All these claims of strength are a bunch of B.S.
Glass is not for everyone, some should stick with safer fisher-price plastic phone.
That's awesome.
That's right up there with, "What's a megaflop?"
That was Steve's only weakness: when other people knew that he didn't know what he was talking about. Of course, going on to actually teach him the stuff makes you lose your leverage over him?
Yet their article is inaccurate and incomplete.
I have a graduate degree in science and had plenty of graduate level classes. While we normally used metric units, of course, we also used English units. Pound was universally used as a FORCE and if we wanted to use it as a mass (although there was rarely any reason to do so), we would use 'pound-mass'.
Incorrect. Pound-force is the default. If you say simply 'pound', it means force. Anyone using 'pound' to mean mass is sloppy - and that sloppiness would never be tolerated in real science.
Interesting; what field did you study? As a ChE, our usage of pounds was almost always pounds-mass, so i tend to assume that.
Yet their article is inaccurate and incomplete.
I have a graduate degree in science and had plenty of graduate level classes. While we normally used metric units, of course, we also used English units. Pound was universally used as a FORCE and if we wanted to use it as a mass (although there was rarely any reason to do so), we would use 'pound-mass'.
I'm sure that your qualifications are excellent, but are you quite sure that you want to use your graduate class experience as the definitive ruling on this? I'm curious - since mass is one of the fundamental quantities in physics - how come you rarely needed it?
Incorrect. Pound-force is the default. If you say simply 'pound', it means force. Anyone using 'pound' to mean mass is sloppy - and that sloppiness would never be tolerated in real science.
OK - I guess we simply disagree on this point. When I review journal articles for publication, if SI, though preferred, is not used, I require lbf for force. I am unaware of any publishing format guidance that follows the opposite convention that you have used, but perhaps you can point to some? Alternatively, do you have a better source than Wikipedia to support your view on this?
Anyway - we are digging in the weeds of archaic unit systems that should have been abandoned years ago in favor of SI, and we are only arguing about notation conventions, rather than substantive issues of meaning or use, and we are getting rather off topic.
I am surprised Apple didn't make moves to restrict access for competing companies.
My recollection was it was out of patent protection, having been invented in the late 60's. No sense making an exclusive deal with a manufacturer if someone else can duplicate the process.
No, Newtons are a unit of force, grams are a unit of mass, and pounds are a bizarre anachronism of the British Imperial system of units, which for some reason the United States of America has decided to cling to (despite a fairly violent split from the British Empire from 1773 through about the next century).
<...>
^^This.
I usually tend to understand pound-mass when I say pound, much like majjo has pointed out. The reason for this is simple: when I buy a pound of apples at the market, I expect 453.59237 grams of apples, not 4.44822162 newtons of apples. How that is being measured is immaterial to me, as long as I'm not getting ripped off.
Bless you Scotty!