Sapphire production for Apple reportedly underway with 100-furnace trial at Arizona facility

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 34
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    aaplfanboy wrote: »
    Seems pointless using this plant to supply sapphire glass parts for 5s when obviously Apple has enough to meet demand from elsewhere already. GT are obviously gearing up to supply sapphire glass screens or parts for iwatch/iphone6 etc. Watch this space!!

    A 25% price difference would cause most manufactures to run away from current suppliers. So that is reason enough. Given that though I suspect this material is iWatch destined. This method of production doesn't produce the very large crystals that would allow for a large iPhone screen. At least it hasn't in the past, it would be nice to be wrong here.
  • Reply 22 of 34
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    It is also well established as a material for building whale-sized aquariums. Known in some circles as "transparent aluminum", the synthetic sapphire debuted to the mass market in StarTrek4: The Voyage Home, and was schematized on a Macintosh.  Of course.  :)

    What is less well known is that at the time they made this movie and plugged in this little reveal was that this technology was closely guarded military tech. It is or was a significant leak at the time. Variants of this material can produce extremely bullet resistant windows.
  • Reply 23 of 34
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by asdasd View Post



    It looks like the jurors are trying to discuss facts not presented at the case but maybe read about elsewhere. That could be grounds for a mistrial.

     

    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2004/03/when_can_a_judge_declare_a_mistrial.html

  • Reply 24 of 34
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





    In effect Judge's Koh's answer is "Deal with it. There's nothing more to give you than what has already been testified to"

     

    Correct. I still found their questions to be quite odd.

  • Reply 25 of 34
    evilutionevilution Posts: 1,399member

    So, we went way off topic from sapphire glass to Apple Vs Samsung in 1 post.

    Is there not a better thread to have posted that "update" in?

  • Reply 26 of 34
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Chandra69 View Post

     

    Is Corning reading this?


    A lot of people realized Corning was talking nonsense when it bashed Apple's efforts with sapphire and responded accurately to it.

     

    I am looking forward to reading what Corning says next about the expense of sapphire when compared to Gorilla Glass.

     

    A 25% cost reduction for sapphire is a major financial benefit to Apple in the short and long terms.

     

    The savings can be funneled for more research into sapphire or another technology.

     

    Hmmm... I nearly forgot Wall Street does not believe Apple does research anymore and therefore is no longer innovative!

     

    I could not resist that little dig.  :-)))

  • Reply 27 of 34
    It seems like the amount of sapphire about to be produced is going to be much larger than what would be needed just for iWatch. I could see Apple releasing a 4" iPhone 6 with an updated design and A8, starting at $199 as we would expect, but also release a 4.7" with liquid metal and sapphire starting at $299, and possibly the 5.5" starting at $399. It sounds like a lot, but the pitch would make a lot of sense. All they have to do is show the most popular current sapphire screened phones, for example the ridiculous android Verdu that is priced at $10,000, and do what apple does best, make luxury affordable, "for less than 1/10th the price of the current leading sapphire smartphone." This would also further improve margins and allow Apple to aggressively price the 5c and 6c in developing markets. Seems like a win win scenario for Apple.


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

     
     

    A 25% price difference would cause most manufactures to run away from current suppliers. So that is reason enough. Given that though I suspect this material is iWatch destined. This method of production doesn't produce the very large crystals that would allow for a large iPhone screen. At least it hasn't in the past, it would be nice to be wrong here.

    8" x 11" pieces of paper resting on the boules

     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

     

    Update on the Samsung-Apple trial...

     

    OMG these jurors seem much less informed than the average person. Here are 4 questions they passed to Judge Koh:

     

     



    1. "What did Steve Jobs say at the moment he directed, or decided to prosecute, a case against Samsung? Was Google mentioned, and/or include in that directive, or subsequent directives, to be included in any way in the case?"


    2. "How were the five Apple patents chosen? Were they identified to Apple execs prior tot he decision to pursue patent infringement, or after?"


    3. "How were the two patents chosen by Samsung to be purchased? Who specifically, and initially, recommended that purchase, and what was his/her title?"


    4. "What did the CEO of Samsung say or write, at the moment he first heard about Apple Corp. [sic]" believing Samsung was infringing their intellectual property? What subsequent direction did he give to his team as to how to respond?"

       


    http://www.fosspatents.com/2014/04/first-jury-questions-in-apple-v-samsung.html


    Wow, that is pretty ridiculous. Shouldn't be a surprise, unfortunately, but it looks like the jury is preparing to make and emotional decision based on "he said, she said" arguments, instead of carefully weighing the arguments in an intellectual and objective fashion. I don't know how there could be any debating going on when samsung basically produced a manual on how to copy Apple.. it couldn't be more obvious!

  • Reply 28 of 34
    Dudes! Corning has already said how unimpressed they are by sapphire. "We produce glass that's just as good or even better," Corning spokesperson Clarity VansParent said two months ago, "And it's available now!"
  • Reply 29 of 34
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

     


    1. "What did Steve Jobs say at the moment he directed, or decided to prosecute, a case against Samsung? Was Google mentioned, and/or include in that directive, or subsequent directives, to be included in any way in the case?"


    2. "How were the five Apple patents chosen? Were they identified to Apple execs prior tot he decision to pursue patent infringement, or after?"


    3. "How were the two patents chosen by Samsung to be purchased? Who specifically, and initially, recommended that purchase, and what was his/her title?"


    4. "What did the CEO of Samsung say or write, at the moment he first heard about Apple Corp. [sic]" believing Samsung was infringing their intellectual property? What subsequent direction did he give to his team as to how to respond?"




     

    1. The lawsuit is about Samsung. Ignore everything but Samsung. Unless, of course, you want to know about Google to give Apple carte blanche to sue THEM later with a precedent.

    2. HOW STUPID CAN YOU POSSIBLY BE. KOH ILLEGALLY LIMITED APPLE’S FILING. THAT’S WHY THESE WERE CHOSEN.

    3. They were patents that matched what Apple was doing, and for no other reason.

    4. “Alert my mafia contacts. Tell them to make Apple… ‘unemployed', if you know what I mean. Get it? Without ‘Jobs'? Huh? I thought it was a good one.”

  • Reply 30 of 34
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

     

     

    1. The lawsuit is about Samsung. Ignore everything but Samsung. Unless, of course, you want to know about Google to give Apple carte blanche to sue THEM later with a precedent.

    2. HOW STUPID CAN YOU POSSIBLY BE. KOH ILLEGALLY LIMITED APPLE’S FILING. THAT’S WHY THESE WERE CHOSEN.

    3. They were patents that matched what Apple was doing, and for no other reason.

    4. “Alert my mafia contacts. Tell them to make Apple… ‘unemployed', if you know what I mean. Get it? Without ‘Jobs'? Huh? I thought it was a good one.”


     

    Yeah... This is turning into one wacky trial.

  • Reply 31 of 34
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,787member
    aaplfanboy wrote: »
    Seems pointless using this plant to supply sapphire glass parts for 5s when obviously Apple has enough to meet demand from elsewhere already. GT are obviously gearing up to supply sapphire glass screens or parts for iwatch/iphone6 etc. Watch this space!!

    Perhaps it's camera lenses.

    I keep getting the feeling Apple haven't finished with the camera industry. 4K is about to become the standard in video over the next few years and Apple so far have not moved into that space. Massive sensors allow for huge digital zooms without pixel doubling but require very high quality optics.
  • Reply 32 of 34
    jetzjetz Posts: 1,293member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post





    Perhaps it's camera lenses.

     

     

    That much sapphire, and that many ovens for just lenses? I seriously doubt that.  It's the screen.  Either this iPhone or the next.  And shortly thereafter the iPhone Mini and moving up after that.

  • Reply 33 of 34
    talkpagetalkpage Posts: 2member
    for the latest iphone rumors visit http://talkpage.in
Sign In or Register to comment.