My first thoughts about Carbon Fiber is it's the exact opposite direction to take for recycling and limiting the use of plastics. It looks like crap when it gets worn and gets that chalky scratched up look. Just sayin...
I agree with the criticisms of CF. Not recyclable. Has wear issues. Exposed fibers can be harmful. It's really nothing more than glorified fiberglass.
The aluminum unibody used today is a marvel of rigidity and precision. Molding something like CF is certainly not as precise. The only advantage I see is lightness.
Wait for it…….new lawsuit against anyone making any ""aesthetically pleasing" parts from carbon fiber and other resin based composites." Yep, if it's "aesthetically pleasing" and a composite(i.e. filled plastic), Apple will sue for infringement.
I have to agree. I was at Lockheed a few weeks ago working on a project for them. They were molding some carbon fiber aircraft parts using a process that looks exactly like this patent. It was a two piece aluminum mold with a ceramic non-stick coating. The upper and lower mold sections had heaters in them to warm the mold and also liquid cooling to chill it. It used ejector pins around the perimeter along with air pressure to release the part from the mold...
I really do not see much difference from this patent claim.....
Thanks for posting. I am glad that I am not the only one who sees through Apple's efforts to patent existing technology.
If Apple spent more time producing product than litigating we, the customers, would benefit greatly.
Do other companies patent stuff like this all the time?
Yes they do.
Apple was just granted a patent for a carbon fiber molding process... streamlining the method of molding carbon fiber.
Were other companies on the brink of this new method too... but Apple just beat them to the patent office?
Carbon fiber materials have been in use for decades there are many methods to employ the stuff. Is this method unique, I can't say for sure but it does appear to be an adaptation of an injection molding process. If I understand the patent correctly it looks like a very high volume method.
Or is this one of those crazy ideas that only Apple would ever think of... yet it will be deemed "obvious" when everyone else want to use it? Who wants to bet some other company will end up doing it... and get dragged into court?
Legitimate companies won't want to get dragged into court for obvious violations like you imply. Is it obvious maybe but that isn't the question, the question is has something similar been employed in the past. Many patentable processes have been adaptations of previous technology used in different ways.
My point is.... starting today Apple has a patent on a new method of carbon fiber production. If you want to use it... you have to license it. Or come up with your own method.
So? There is nothing unusal here. This patent is likely something that would be easy to license from Apple for non competeing products.
I only bring it up because of the recent courtroom battles.
Again I don't know what your point is. Like I said legitimate companies don't steal. This is really only an issue for those that want to compete with Apple materials wise.
Seriously guy Apple has never used the patent system to crush the competition. They have used it to protect themselves against thieves. Why people can't grasp the difference is beyond me. If you can look at Samsung devices and honestly say they didn't steal Apples designs then there is something wrong with your value system.
I don't care for Apple's patenting this, given how nasty they're getting at using patents to crush competition. But I've never cared for metal laptop enclosures, since that can make WiFi coverage spotty. It'd be great if carbon fiber could come to the next generation MacBook Air.
I know Apple were patenting a molding process, not a product. I wonder which part of this Apple thinks is new, the ejector pins?
Air pressure is already used to eject parts from molds. Two part molds aren't new either. Guide pins aren't new. I will be surprised if anything in this patent is new.
The only thing that really needs to be new is the application of the technology to a specific use. An example from history would be Fords patent on the so called ladder frame used in its trucks.
If anyone can pull it off, it's Apple. I'm not a fan of carbon fiber though. It's just a nasty process to work with. Recycling that stuff is not a walk in the park. It doesn't seem to be Apple's style to be mass-producing that stuff.
Agree. Not sure that CF is recyclable enough to satisfy Greenpeace. And from what I've heard, CF is easy to scratch.
I seem to remember Apple hiring a CF manufacturing process expert a few years ago. And I also seem to remember that
Apple submitted a patent request (or received a patent) on a method of attaching a metal "skin" to a CF chassis.
This would add extra strength, reduce the scratching problem, and allow for Apple to maintain the metallic product appearance.
Maybe the next-next-gen MacBook Air will have that construction. (If CF can be recycled efficiently enough.)
I believe Lenovo makes carbon fiber laptops. But obviously these patents are about specific methods and implementation. Of course cue the trolls who will oversimplify and claim Apple is patenting carbon fiber laptops when [insert competitor name here] has been doing so for years.
The sad thing is: you may be joking, but this will happen.
It burns. Further it is a method of binding carbon. Asti is the whole dog and pony show about recyclability is becoming a bit tiresome. It takes a lot of energy to recycle aluminum.
Has wear issues.
So does aluminum! This is why many carry their laptops in cases.
Exposed fibers can be harmful.
So can an exposed edge on aluminum.
It's really nothing more than glorified fiberglass.
And what is wrong with fiberglass? Seriously Corvets have been using it for ages.
I suspect you miss an important point here though these materials can absorb energy in ways that materials like Aluminum can't. This means Apple can build devices that effectively are more durable when dropped.
The aluminum unibody used today is a marvel of rigidity and precision.
A nice design for sure, a marvel not so much. More than anything else this an example of how far we have come these days with the capability of CNC machines. If you think Unibody is impressive take a tour of any CNC based machine shop, you will be amazed.
Apples great accomplishment with Unibody isn't so much the CNC part as it is the mass production part.
Molding something like CF is certainly not as precise. The only advantage I see is lightness.
The process really doesn't have to be precise. Think about it, you mold a part and then trim it to size. Tolerances can be very precise. Lightness is important also, I wouldnt be surprised to see this process used in the manufacture of chassis for iPads first, maybe even the rumored iPad Mini. Done right it would yield a very light but ridged Mini. A Mini by the way that could take some abuse. I wouldn't be at all surprised to find the next Mini with all of its components potted right into the chassis in such a way as to produce a single mass. Take this a step further and the chassis can become the circuit board yielding a device that is thinner again and effectively reduces waste even more.
Samsung will copy it and make defective duplicates which their customers will try to return to the Apple Store. Apple will sue for patent infringement and Samsung will claim that they actually invented the process. Samsung and Google will issue press releases saying that not allowing customers to choose between "Apple" and "Fake Apple" limits consumer choice and that not allowing Samsung to copy stuff "stifles innovation." Fan-boys on both sides will riot. Samsung and Google fan-boys will rage that they will NEVER buy an Apple product (as if we didn't already know that) and Apple fan-boys will defend Apple to the death. Meanwhile, Microsoft will actually innovate -- inventing a new process that will make "aesthetically unpleasant" parts from carbon fiber and other resins.
That doesn't exclude this patent from covering something new, assuming it does, I don't know.
I wouldn't use this article's contents as something to critique the patent, because patent information is too easily misrepresented, and I doubt AI has any patent lawyers writing for them to know how to properly represent the essence of a patent's contents. Even then, the patent lawyer would have to collaborate with a mold engineer to get the skinny on what is already practiced vs. what is new.
I'm too busy to thoroughly scrutinize the patent document though. One thing I know I don't know about is the type of material used to coat the molds.
Comments
My first thoughts about Carbon Fiber is it's the exact opposite direction to take for recycling and limiting the use of plastics. It looks like crap when it gets worn and gets that chalky scratched up look. Just sayin...
I agree with the criticisms of CF. Not recyclable. Has wear issues. Exposed fibers can be harmful. It's really nothing more than glorified fiberglass.
The aluminum unibody used today is a marvel of rigidity and precision. Molding something like CF is certainly not as precise. The only advantage I see is lightness.
Originally Posted by doug0613
I'm presently copyrighting the letter A in addition to patenting wood and flat glass...
Could you people at least stop for a month or so? My list is getting longer than I ever wanted it to be.
Wait for it.......new lawsuit against anyone making any ""aesthetically pleasing" parts from carbon fiber and other resin based composites."
Yep, if it's "aesthetically pleasing" and a composite(ie filled plastic), Apple will sue for infringement.
Originally Posted by yutube
Wait for it…….new lawsuit against anyone making any ""aesthetically pleasing" parts from carbon fiber and other resin based composites." Yep, if it's "aesthetically pleasing" and a composite(i.e. filled plastic), Apple will sue for infringement.
No. Seriously. Stop it, you fools.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sranger
I have to agree. I was at Lockheed a few weeks ago working on a project for them. They were molding some carbon fiber aircraft parts using a process that looks exactly like this patent. It was a two piece aluminum mold with a ceramic non-stick coating. The upper and lower mold sections had heaters in them to warm the mold and also liquid cooling to chill it. It used ejector pins around the perimeter along with air pressure to release the part from the mold...
I really do not see much difference from this patent claim.....
Thanks for posting. I am glad that I am not the only one who sees through Apple's efforts to patent existing technology.
If Apple spent more time producing product than litigating we, the customers, would benefit greatly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Could you people at least stop for a month or so? My list is getting longer than I ever wanted it to be.
???
What is wrong with a bit of satire?
Cheers
Originally Posted by RBR
What is wrong with a bit of satire?
Nothing at all, when it is. Sadly, it isn't. Not with many here.
Again I don't know what your point is. Like I said legitimate companies don't steal. This is really only an issue for those that want to compete with Apple materials wise.
The only thing that really needs to be new is the application of the technology to a specific use. An example from history would be Fords patent on the so called ladder frame used in its trucks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal
If anyone can pull it off, it's Apple. I'm not a fan of carbon fiber though. It's just a nasty process to work with. Recycling that stuff is not a walk in the park. It doesn't seem to be Apple's style to be mass-producing that stuff.
Agree. Not sure that CF is recyclable enough to satisfy Greenpeace. And from what I've heard, CF is easy to scratch.
I seem to remember Apple hiring a CF manufacturing process expert a few years ago. And I also seem to remember that
Apple submitted a patent request (or received a patent) on a method of attaching a metal "skin" to a CF chassis.
This would add extra strength, reduce the scratching problem, and allow for Apple to maintain the metallic product appearance.
Maybe the next-next-gen MacBook Air will have that construction. (If CF can be recycled efficiently enough.)
The sad thing is: you may be joking, but this will happen.
I suspect you miss an important point here though these materials can absorb energy in ways that materials like Aluminum can't. This means Apple can build devices that effectively are more durable when dropped. A nice design for sure, a marvel not so much. More than anything else this an example of how far we have come these days with the capability of CNC machines. If you think Unibody is impressive take a tour of any CNC based machine shop, you will be amazed.
Apples great accomplishment with Unibody isn't so much the CNC part as it is the mass production part. The process really doesn't have to be precise. Think about it, you mold a part and then trim it to size. Tolerances can be very precise. Lightness is important also, I wouldnt be surprised to see this process used in the manufacture of chassis for iPads first, maybe even the rumored iPad Mini. Done right it would yield a very light but ridged Mini. A Mini by the way that could take some abuse. I wouldn't be at all surprised to find the next Mini with all of its components potted right into the chassis in such a way as to produce a single mass. Take this a step further and the chassis can become the circuit board yielding a device that is thinner again and effectively reduces waste even more.
I agree with the criticisms of CF.
And please don't call me names.
Thank you.
Samsung will copy it and make defective duplicates which their customers will try to return to the Apple Store. Apple will sue for patent infringement and Samsung will claim that they actually invented the process. Samsung and Google will issue press releases saying that not allowing customers to choose between "Apple" and "Fake Apple" limits consumer choice and that not allowing Samsung to copy stuff "stifles innovation." Fan-boys on both sides will riot. Samsung and Google fan-boys will rage that they will NEVER buy an Apple product (as if we didn't already know that) and Apple fan-boys will defend Apple to the death. Meanwhile, Microsoft will actually innovate -- inventing a new process that will make "aesthetically unpleasant" parts from carbon fiber and other resins.
Saw this a few days ago...from Lenovo
http://youtu.be/g63VY670pvE
Originally Posted by HouseDivided
Saw this a few days ago...from Lenovo
And?
That doesn't exclude this patent from covering something new, assuming it does, I don't know.
I wouldn't use this article's contents as something to critique the patent, because patent information is too easily misrepresented, and I doubt AI has any patent lawyers writing for them to know how to properly represent the essence of a patent's contents. Even then, the patent lawyer would have to collaborate with a mold engineer to get the skinny on what is already practiced vs. what is new.
I'm too busy to thoroughly scrutinize the patent document though. One thing I know I don't know about is the type of material used to coat the molds.
deleted