Another fine opinion. Albeit, one arrived at with little to no supporting evidence, but I can tell you believe it, so it'll have to work.
lol. Whiny... what an ideal word to describe this conversation
Once again a useless post with no evidence, opinion or data. Just nerd sneers. Off to ignore with you.
A note on logic. I said there were no significant complaints about scratching of Apple products. You asked for "evidence of that ". Clearly I can't give evidence of no or few reports. The evidence would have to go the other way, evidence you didn't supply. Not only have you contributed nothing to this debate but sneers, you feel comfortable with demanding evidence while providing none.
I take it you believe that Apple products are prone to scruff, scratches and other blemishes and that is a major problem which needs fixing with new materials. You haven't of course said that, because you haven't said anything, just sneered at other people claiming the opposite. You provide no opinion but put downs.
However if that is what you believe provide the evidence that Apple products are at the moment not very durable.
As probably the only one in here who owns a Vertu phone, I can defiantly say Saphire is the way to go regardless of weight. Though light weight devices are nice, I would always rather have a stronger built phone. The iPhone has a problem, it cracks, yes it does and I really don't care to hear about people who have never broke theirs. I've personally seen an iPhone drop less than a quarter of a meter and shatter and there isn't a day that I am out and about that I haven't seen at least 5 iPhones with a cracked screen, no exaggeration, It's a problem, there are shops popping up all over that do nothing but fix iPhones, they wouldn't be there if the iPhone didn't have a big problem. Though I don't want see these businesses go out of business, Apple needs a stronger phone, period. If that means it gains a little weight, then so be it.
I have a scratch free unblemished iPhone 4S in my hand right now. And I don't use a case nor really protect it.
Seems good enough materials right now.
According to a UK insurance company there is a 25% chance that your iPhone will crack. Orange and Swisscom here in Switzerland have upped the monthly insurance for iPhones because of the amount phones that have come backed for repair. In the last year alone there have been over 3 new shops that have opened in my area alone that do nothing but replace cracked screen for iPhones, I live a town with less then 60,000 people. My daughter, yes she is a teenager has had her iPhone 5's screen replaced 4 times, all of her friends have a cracked screen or have had theirs replaced, every single one of them. When I go to her school, I would with out a doubt say more then half of the kids their have an iPhone with a cracked screen. Yes, they are children but my son who has a Nokia 905 has dropped his phone more times than I can count without so much as a scratch, the iPhone has a problem and it needs to be addressed.
Sounds like a lie to me. If anything, there's a 25% chance that citizens of the UK can't figure out how to take care of their possessions.
It's bullshit because there is no time parameter or other qualifying aspects like "dropping once from 5 foot up on a hard surface without using a case." The latter is more detailed but you at least need an absolute or general time parameter otherwise I can guarantee you that 100% of all iPhone will eventually be destroyed.
lol. I love how people portray opinion as fact. In the future, when you have no evidence to support an idea, try leading off with, "I believe" or "My guess is that". This way, readers can actually read your posts without feeling the urge to challenge their validity.
All in all, a respectable prediction, but nothing more.[/quota
Thanks but all we really needs was your last line.
lol. I love how people portray opinion as fact. In the future, when you have no evidence to support an idea, try leading off with, "I believe" or "My guess is that". This way, readers can actually read your posts without feeling the urge to challenge their validity.
All in all, a respectable prediction, but nothing more.
Thanks but all we reall need is your last line. No Apple officials nor anyone in the know post here so of course it's opinion. Everything is opinion in this forum unless it's a quoted press release fact from Apple.
As probably the only one in here who owns a Vertu phone, I can defiantly say Saphire is the way to go regardless of weight. Though light weight devices are nice, I would always rather have a stronger built phone. The iPhone has a problem, it cracks
Sapphire isn't the answer. It actually cracks MORE easily than Gorilla Glass. Its advantage is in scratch resistance. Since GG is apparently more than adequate in that respect, going to sapphire would seem to be a step down.
How do you know they never intended to use it on shipped product? What would they use it for? Unshipped product? All we know is they are still researching the technology since patents are still coming out and they renewed the contract with LQMT. Of course they are exploring the material for a possible product that they intend to ship. They are trying to make money after all.
Way to read my post. Apple spends money and patents hundreds of things every year that will never see the light of day. My point was that liquid metal will probably never be used in a shipping product because it doesn't have to be. It's a material that lends to quick prototyping and gives instant feedback with metallic materials so why do they even need to ship it? Especially since it can't be mass produced in volume at a reasonable cost.
In the last year alone there have been over 3 new shops that have opened in my area alone
Over 3? So, 4? 5? 83,962?
Sorry, just kidding around. I've just never understood why the use of "over" when stating a figure has become so pervasive. It makes sense in the context of large numbers where specificity is pedantic, as in "15,726 people attended the event." In that case it makes sense to just say "over 15,000." There's just no need for it when talking about smaller numbers, though. Why not just say "3?" Or, if you're not sure if there may be more, "at least 3."
Sorry, just kidding around. I've just never understood why the use of "over" when stating a figure has become so pervasive. It makes sense in the context of large numbers where specificity is pedantic, as in "15,726 people attended the event." In that case it makes sense to just say "over 15,000." There's just no need for it when talking about smaller numbers, though. Why not just say "3?" Or, if you're not sure if there may be more, "at least 3."
English isn't my native tongue and even though I think I have a good understanding of it there are still little things that I mess up, thanks for the tip, I'll use your recommendation next time.
Sounds like a lie to me. If anything, there's a 25% chance that citizens of the UK can't figure out how to take care of their possessions.
I wouldn't lie to make a point, even if these numbers are inflated how do you explain the ever increasing amount of iPhone repair shops popping up everywhere, they wouldn't be in business unless they weren't making money. Yes I agree, people need to take better care of their devices but accidents do happen regardless of how careful an individual is. I'm just saying that Apple could make their devices a little tougher, maybe start by removing the glass from the back which serves no purpose other the aesthetics and will defiantly bring the cost of repairs down. As a parent though unless the next model is beefed up I will have to say no to my daughter when she wants a new one, as the cost of maintenance, specifically display repair is just to high. Thank goodness my son is into Xbox and likes having a Windows phone to talk with all of his Xbox buddies, he is on his second Nokia Lumia and has never had a problem with them, darn things are almost indestructible.
I'm not saying the iPhone isn't good, my daughter and husband love'em and couldn't imagine having anything else. I just think Apple could put a little more effort into making them stronger, that's it.
You don't need to pay for exclusive use in all consumer electronic products for all eternity just to prototype it. At least that's not what we do in our company. It makes more sense that they already prototyped it and liked what they saw and then signed this contract. Now they are working to mass produce it.
According to a UK insurance company there is a 25% chance that your iPhone will crack. Orange and Swisscom here in Switzerland have upped the monthly insurance for iPhones because of the amount phones that have come backed for repair. In the last year alone there have been over 3 new shops that have opened in my area alone that do nothing but replace cracked screen for iPhones, I live a town with less then 60,000 people. My daughter, yes she is a teenager has had her iPhone 5's screen replaced 4 times, all of her friends have a cracked screen or have had theirs replaced, every single one of them. When I go to her school, I would with out a doubt say more then half of the kids their have an iPhone with a cracked screen. Yes, they are children but my son who has a Nokia 905 has dropped his phone more times than I can count without so much as a scratch, the iPhone has a problem and it needs to be addressed.
Not trying to be a jerk, but what is wrong with these people? I'm not kidding.
You don't need to pay for exclusive use in all consumer electronic products for all eternity just to prototype it. At least that's not what we do in our company. It makes more sense that they already prototyped it and liked what they saw and then signed this contract. Now they are working to mass produce it.
That's not what he meant. He's talking about using LM as a material for building prototype products in the lab.
The thought is a good one, but I don't think Apple needed to sign a deal for exclusive use of the material if that's all they intend to do with it. The fact that they did suggests they expect, or at least hope, to use it in a released product. IMHO anyway. YMMV.
English isn't my native tongue and even though I think I have a good understanding of it there are still little things that I mess up, thanks for the tip, I'll use your recommendation next time.
I wouldn't say you "messed up." I'd say you probably picked up on the common vernacular and are merely repeating what you've seen written and heard spoken. This particular mis-use of the term is really pervasive, even among those who should know better!
Great article btw. Good research. Informative about the processes and constraints. Mild but supportable conclusions. Old school journalism.
I am sorry to say the article is actually really lacking in research. Over the last months, Patentlyapple has published many Apple patent applications covering manufacture of sapphire and embedding sapphire in a luquid metal chassis. Specifically, one sapphire patent is showing how Apple intends to overcame the material's weaknesses by applying only a thin layer of sapphire on a glass layer. No mention of that in the article. Also, no mention of the recent Jony new materials comments and the second sapphire plant news.
I am not saying that the patents prove there will be sapphire iPhones and other products this year but not mentioning them is not good journalism. I really appreciate AI's editorials but sadly this ranks as one of their weakest and worst researched.
The obvious thing here is that they have built a huge factory to produce this stuff. It appears that the factory has excess capacity relative to the needs of Touch ID and camera lenses, so that material has to be going someplace. For mystery fans it certainly is something to speculate about.
Given this the materials has many potential uses that are ignored by the press. Everything from heat spreaders to substrates for electronics are a possibility.
You are correct and this is one of the things that has been in the back of my mind since I hear Apple made this investment. Back in the 80's the any product going into space with electronics in them were build with a technique called Silicon on sapphire. This was done for a number of reason, one was heat dissipation. The other reason, it protected the devices from solar rations or what they call gamma particle hits. It basically harden the device against being rendered unless in solar radiation. There are lots of other practical uses for sapphire which could bring more value then a big phone display.
…how do you explain the ever increasing amount of iPhone repair shops popping up everywhere…
It’s called “capitalizing on idiots”. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the build quality of the iPhone, et. al.
…but accidents do happen regardless of how careful an individual is.
Lady Luck has no memory. We’re alike in that way; I ought to ask her out on a date. I can show her my Day One first-gen iPhone–which I have never used with a case–without a scratch, bump, crack, or dent on it…
I’m just saying that Apple could make their devices a little tougher, maybe start by removing the glass from the back which serves no purpose other the aesthetics…
It’s like you don’t know Apple. Or why they use glass.
Thank goodness my son is into Xbox… …darn things are almost indestructible.
Physically, maybe. Software-wise, the RRoD killed 60% of Xbox 360s.
Then, of course, there’s the Nintendium mines of central Japan, out of which is mined the strongest material known to mankind, and which gives Nintendo products freakish resilience.
...how do you explain the ever increasing amount of iPhone repair shops popping up everywhere...
1) Aren't there like a half a billion iPhones that have been sold? You don't see a correlation there? Don't make some idiotic comment about Android "activations" being higher as that has no barring on a single Android device with the same display component or the customer that cares about their quality product.
2) Based on your "logic" there would have been more of these repair shops popping up for the iPhone 4/4S than there are now since the back is nearly all metal. But there aren't because there are more people buying iPhones as well as using them for years longer than other vendor's phones.
3) How do you explain automotive glass repair shops? Does that mean that 25% of automobiles have broken windshield?
4) I'm just remembering that you're the one that swore up and down that Apple was using "regular" glass, not alkali-aluminosilicate sheet toughened glass. :no: So much for not lying to make a point.
Comments
Once again a useless post with no evidence, opinion or data. Just nerd sneers. Off to ignore with you.
A note on logic. I said there were no significant complaints about scratching of Apple products. You asked for "evidence of that ". Clearly I can't give evidence of no or few reports. The evidence would have to go the other way, evidence you didn't supply. Not only have you contributed nothing to this debate but sneers, you feel comfortable with demanding evidence while providing none.
I take it you believe that Apple products are prone to scruff, scratches and other blemishes and that is a major problem which needs fixing with new materials. You haven't of course said that, because you haven't said anything, just sneered at other people claiming the opposite. You provide no opinion but put downs.
However if that is what you believe provide the evidence that Apple products are at the moment not very durable.
According to a UK insurance company there is a 25% chance that your iPhone will crack. Orange and Swisscom here in Switzerland have upped the monthly insurance for iPhones because of the amount phones that have come backed for repair. In the last year alone there have been over 3 new shops that have opened in my area alone that do nothing but replace cracked screen for iPhones, I live a town with less then 60,000 people. My daughter, yes she is a teenager has had her iPhone 5's screen replaced 4 times, all of her friends have a cracked screen or have had theirs replaced, every single one of them. When I go to her school, I would with out a doubt say more then half of the kids their have an iPhone with a cracked screen. Yes, they are children but my son who has a Nokia 905 has dropped his phone more times than I can count without so much as a scratch, the iPhone has a problem and it needs to be addressed.
Sounds like a lie to me. If anything, there's a 25% chance that citizens of the UK can't figure out how to take care of their possessions.
It's bullshit because there is no time parameter or other qualifying aspects like "dropping once from 5 foot up on a hard surface without using a case." The latter is more detailed but you at least need an absolute or general time parameter otherwise I can guarantee you that 100% of all iPhone will eventually be destroyed.
As probably the only one in here who owns a Vertu phone, I can defiantly say Saphire is the way to go regardless of weight. Though light weight devices are nice, I would always rather have a stronger built phone. The iPhone has a problem, it cracks
Sapphire isn't the answer. It actually cracks MORE easily than Gorilla Glass. Its advantage is in scratch resistance. Since GG is apparently more than adequate in that respect, going to sapphire would seem to be a step down.
Way to read my post. Apple spends money and patents hundreds of things every year that will never see the light of day. My point was that liquid metal will probably never be used in a shipping product because it doesn't have to be. It's a material that lends to quick prototyping and gives instant feedback with metallic materials so why do they even need to ship it? Especially since it can't be mass produced in volume at a reasonable cost.
In the last year alone there have been over 3 new shops that have opened in my area alone
Over 3? So, 4? 5? 83,962?
Sorry, just kidding around. I've just never understood why the use of "over" when stating a figure has become so pervasive. It makes sense in the context of large numbers where specificity is pedantic, as in "15,726 people attended the event." In that case it makes sense to just say "over 15,000." There's just no need for it when talking about smaller numbers, though. Why not just say "3?" Or, if you're not sure if there may be more, "at least 3."
English isn't my native tongue and even though I think I have a good understanding of it there are still little things that I mess up, thanks for the tip, I'll use your recommendation next time.
I wouldn't lie to make a point, even if these numbers are inflated how do you explain the ever increasing amount of iPhone repair shops popping up everywhere, they wouldn't be in business unless they weren't making money. Yes I agree, people need to take better care of their devices but accidents do happen regardless of how careful an individual is. I'm just saying that Apple could make their devices a little tougher, maybe start by removing the glass from the back which serves no purpose other the aesthetics and will defiantly bring the cost of repairs down. As a parent though unless the next model is beefed up I will have to say no to my daughter when she wants a new one, as the cost of maintenance, specifically display repair is just to high. Thank goodness my son is into Xbox and likes having a Windows phone to talk with all of his Xbox buddies, he is on his second Nokia Lumia and has never had a problem with them, darn things are almost indestructible.
I'm not saying the iPhone isn't good, my daughter and husband love'em and couldn't imagine having anything else. I just think Apple could put a little more effort into making them stronger, that's it.
You don't need to pay for exclusive use in all consumer electronic products for all eternity just to prototype it. At least that's not what we do in our company. It makes more sense that they already prototyped it and liked what they saw and then signed this contract. Now they are working to mass produce it.
According to a UK insurance company there is a 25% chance that your iPhone will crack. Orange and Swisscom here in Switzerland have upped the monthly insurance for iPhones because of the amount phones that have come backed for repair. In the last year alone there have been over 3 new shops that have opened in my area alone that do nothing but replace cracked screen for iPhones, I live a town with less then 60,000 people. My daughter, yes she is a teenager has had her iPhone 5's screen replaced 4 times, all of her friends have a cracked screen or have had theirs replaced, every single one of them. When I go to her school, I would with out a doubt say more then half of the kids their have an iPhone with a cracked screen. Yes, they are children but my son who has a Nokia 905 has dropped his phone more times than I can count without so much as a scratch, the iPhone has a problem and it needs to be addressed.
Not trying to be a jerk, but what is wrong with these people? I'm not kidding.
You don't need to pay for exclusive use in all consumer electronic products for all eternity just to prototype it. At least that's not what we do in our company. It makes more sense that they already prototyped it and liked what they saw and then signed this contract. Now they are working to mass produce it.
That's not what he meant. He's talking about using LM as a material for building prototype products in the lab.
The thought is a good one, but I don't think Apple needed to sign a deal for exclusive use of the material if that's all they intend to do with it. The fact that they did suggests they expect, or at least hope, to use it in a released product. IMHO anyway. YMMV.
English isn't my native tongue and even though I think I have a good understanding of it there are still little things that I mess up, thanks for the tip, I'll use your recommendation next time.
I wouldn't say you "messed up." I'd say you probably picked up on the common vernacular and are merely repeating what you've seen written and heard spoken. This particular mis-use of the term is really pervasive, even among those who should know better!
I am sorry to say the article is actually really lacking in research. Over the last months, Patentlyapple has published many Apple patent applications covering manufacture of sapphire and embedding sapphire in a luquid metal chassis. Specifically, one sapphire patent is showing how Apple intends to overcame the material's weaknesses by applying only a thin layer of sapphire on a glass layer. No mention of that in the article. Also, no mention of the recent Jony new materials comments and the second sapphire plant news.
I am not saying that the patents prove there will be sapphire iPhones and other products this year but not mentioning them is not good journalism. I really appreciate AI's editorials but sadly this ranks as one of their weakest and worst researched.
The SIM ejector tool of iPhone 3G is not Liquid Metal either?
The obvious thing here is that they have built a huge factory to produce this stuff. It appears that the factory has excess capacity relative to the needs of Touch ID and camera lenses, so that material has to be going someplace. For mystery fans it certainly is something to speculate about.
Given this the materials has many potential uses that are ignored by the press. Everything from heat spreaders to substrates for electronics are a possibility.
You are correct and this is one of the things that has been in the back of my mind since I hear Apple made this investment. Back in the 80's the any product going into space with electronics in them were build with a technique called Silicon on sapphire. This was done for a number of reason, one was heat dissipation. The other reason, it protected the devices from solar rations or what they call gamma particle hits. It basically harden the device against being rendered unless in solar radiation. There are lots of other practical uses for sapphire which could bring more value then a big phone display.
Oh, not you, certainly.
It’s called “capitalizing on idiots”. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the build quality of the iPhone, et. al.
Lady Luck has no memory. We’re alike in that way; I ought to ask her out on a date. I can show her my Day One first-gen iPhone–which I have never used with a case–without a scratch, bump, crack, or dent on it…
It’s like you don’t know Apple. Or why they use glass.
Physically, maybe. Software-wise, the RRoD killed 60% of Xbox 360s.
Then, of course, there’s the Nintendium mines of central Japan, out of which is mined the strongest material known to mankind, and which gives Nintendo products freakish resilience.
Bombed in the Gulf War. Still works.
1) Aren't there like a half a billion iPhones that have been sold? You don't see a correlation there? Don't make some idiotic comment about Android "activations" being higher as that has no barring on a single Android device with the same display component or the customer that cares about their quality product.
2) Based on your "logic" there would have been more of these repair shops popping up for the iPhone 4/4S than there are now since the back is nearly all metal. But there aren't because there are more people buying iPhones as well as using them for years longer than other vendor's phones.
3) How do you explain automotive glass repair shops? Does that mean that 25% of automobiles have broken windshield?
4) I'm just remembering that you're the one that swore up and down that Apple was using "regular" glass, not alkali-aluminosilicate sheet toughened glass. :no: So much for not lying to make a point.