I guess if people don't chuck their iPhones in the middle of a highly trafficked road, then they should be ok!" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
I hope so, because I dropped my iPhone 4 on the sidewalk and it totally spiderwebbed the screen.
I gave the Apple store $169 to "repair" it and they gave me another one. That one landed on the street but avoided being run over. Aside from a chip in the metal "frame" it seemed okay. At least the screen didn't break anyway.
Then it started to trave houble. It became confused. The email app would open but it couldn't seem to remember where the messages were located. I tried responding to a text message b u t it lagg ed beh wh at I ws typ then it rebooted all on its own.
After three solid minutes of the white apple screen it shut itself off. Five seconds later it came back on. Another three minutes of white apple, then it shut off again. Then it came on again. It did that cycle continuously until i could get an appointment with a Genius at the Apple Store who determined that there were internal injuries and the patient could not be resuscitated. I gave him another $169 plus tax to "repair" it and they gave me another one.
If this trend continues, I should be able to find a way to destroy this one by making it burst into flames.
The point of the essay: The outside of the iPhone is pretty tough already. While I did manage to smash one screen, the second incident demonstrates that even existing iPhones are able to retain structural integrity after impacts that turn the guts to moosh. Maybe what they REALLY need is chips and boards with better impact resistance! " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
It's too bad that they didn't do systematic scratch tests - this would be most effective to help estimate hardness. Get out the garnet sandpaper of equivalent hardness and give it a go. If it's not saphire, then this test would scratch it relatively easily.
Also of interest to me is the possibility that they are using a technique of thermally precompressing (quasi tempering) the material to help prevent brittle fracture. This could make the material effectively harder than regular saphire. Can't wait to get hands on with it...
Hopefully this impressive material will make iPhones virtually unbreakable - from the front anyways. I suspect it will drive a real push on graphene development. It will be a materials arms race if sorts.
I guess if people don't chuck their iPhones in the middle of a highly trafficked road, then they should be ok!" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
More to the point, I hope it isn't in my pocket when it happens!
I find it odd that a car can destroy this while it's on a flat surface but other methods that have a higher force per area (pounding a nail) does nothing.
So if someone can not afford a cure for a disease they have you would like to see them die?
Let me tell you a secret. Money has no real value, but a life is real. If you and I were in a desert, you having a billion dollars and me having several gallons of water do you think I'd take any of your money in exchange for my water?
I may be getting a little deep here, but inhumane views like yours are disturbing to say the least.
I guess you haven't gone back and read all his posts then. If so you'd be used to his inhumane views by now ... Apple][ is the resident comedian and I am sure only kidding as no one is that ... fill in your own description here .... .
I'm kind of more for progress as a whole humanity society. I'm all for patents because they don't last very long and after that everyone can use the idea. When companies file patents the clock starts ticking the second it's submitted once it's approved. The example I provided a link to has been known for between 30 and 40 years and absolutely no one has benefited from it.
There's another from around the same time period that completely eradicated tooth decay and even repaired damaged teeth. I'm having a hard time finding it though. I would be very happy if even one company released either of those materials.
Regarding that video you posted, have you ever Googled the heat shield tiles used on the space shuttle? They withstand temperatures 20 times higher than the torch used to heat that material painted on the egg in the video you posted. I've seen videos of a small cube of shuttle heat tile material blasted with enormous temperatures, then immediately handled by bare human hands. The stuff just doesn't absorb heat. So this guy was either using a form of the same stuff, or he invented it and now you know what it went on to be used for.
So if someone can not afford a cure for a disease they have you would like to see them die?
Let me tell you a secret. Money has no real value, but a life is real. If you and I were in a desert, you having a billion dollars and me having several gallons of water do you think I'd take any of your money in exchange for my water?
I may be getting a little deep here, but inhumane views like yours are disturbing to say the least.
I have a secret for you. Human life, to this planet, is worth exactly as much per kilogram as every other form of mammalian life. A kilogram of biomass is a kilogram of biomass. We're not special and more deserving than other species around us. So the word inhumane, especially in the context you are using, is a bit human-centric and far from the reality of the universe we share. Just as a corporation would deny a being (in this case a human) the benefit of its efforts without equal compensation, so too do we all, in our daily lives of conspicuous consumption of this planet's resources, take for ourselves and thereby deny the other equally deserving creatures those resources, with no equal compensation. Know what you speak of when you attempt to bring the full light of reality to others.
Glad you brought that up. Working the math it's about 800 lbs per tire assuming it's equally distributed. That would be substantially more than I would expect with the how hard he was hammering or driving the nail. What I'm concerned about is more along the lines of if sapphire is going to require the anti-smudge coating as I hear that for the current screens that that is what actually scratches rather than the glass itself. If not then I'm pretty excited to have this on the new iPhones.
That anti-smudge coating, called an oleophobic coating, won't adhere to sapphire, that's true. So Apple is adding a layer of silica glass on top of the sapphire, to which the oleophobic coating will adhere. But wait, you may say, wouldn't that defeat the scratch resistance of the sapphire if the very top layer has to be glass anyway? Well yes, it would, except that this top layer of silica glass would be laid down via a method such as chemical vapor deposition, allowing it to be just a few molecules thick. Enough for the oleophobic coating to adhere too, but so thin that any scratches to it, which would stop at the sapphire layer below it, would be so shallow as to be completely invisible to the human eye. Neat trick.
Well, was looking it up and found that they patented an OLEOPHOBIC COATING ON SAPPHIRE, so it's possible that we might still see scratches on iPhone screens, I don't see anything to suggest that these coating will resist scratches.
See my comment just above this one regarding the way Apple will add a layer above the sapphire to which the oleophobic coating will adhere. This patent speaks to the same issue of adding a layer on top of the sapphire, not adhering an oleophobic coating directly to sapphire, as that's just not chemically possible.
I'm kind of more for progress as a whole humanity society. I'm all for patents because they don't last very long and after that everyone can use the idea. When companies file patents the clock starts ticking the second it's submitted once it's approved. The example I provided a link to has been known for between 30 and 40 years and absolutely no one has benefited from it.
There's another from around the same time period that completely eradicated tooth decay and even repaired damaged teeth. I'm having a hard time finding it though. I would be very happy if even one company released either of those materials.
Hardware patents are "less evil" when it only covers uniqueness of a product, and doesn't prevent a standard from being established. Many of the reasons patents get a bad rap are regarding bad-faith patents (almost entirely dealing with software algorithms and not uniqueness.) For example, the LZW algorithm AFTER it had widespread use in the gif file format. There is no way to re-implement a mathematical algorithm without remaining compatible with other versions of it. It's like having a patent on 1+1=2. The more complex an algorithm is, the less useful a patent on it makes it. Instead it encourages coming up with alternatives that don't utilize the patent in question. In my opinion as long as something is "new" and can be demonstrated as such, fine patent away. But math isn't an invention. People can come up with exactly the same algorithm independently.
Industrial design patents cover the "look" of something. These are a bit more questionable because Apple could theoretically patent an "all-glass" phone or computer and use that as leverage alone.
If it's true that most of the scratches on screens are only at the coating level then it's irrelevant how resistant sapphire is, unless you take the coating off yourself or Apple decides not to apply it to the new sapphire screens any scratches to the screen will be visible. Now if that screen that they tested in the video has the anti smudge coating then I'm impressed and won't worry about it.
It says right in the manual that the Oleophobic coating will wear off over time and not to use any cleaning solutions on the device to preserve it as long as possible. I'm actually rather impressed that I can just rub my hand on it and the screen becomes clean.
Agreed. While I'll need an interpretation of the spoken word, I can easily see where one pebble under a screen (middle right) causing the necessary fulcrum point to cause failure, especially the fracture pattern shown. In all the other cracking tests, the stresses are either distributed, or have rebound (kinetic point in time impact as opposed to an inelastic constant increasing stress).
3 comments
1) it appears that you can get iPhone 6 screens pretty readily.... This makes me think it's an approved 'leak' by Apple (isn't Apple / GT making these and shipping them over to China?... I would assume that inventory control at the assembly plant at this moment while doing assembly testing and building QA systems for regulatory testing. The counts of parts in/parts out can't be more than a couple thousand a day, and a small set of people handling them.
Meaning, that Apple anticipated this Corning Campaign and wants the videos to go viral.
Either that or a box of them got stolen en route.
2) Of all the tests, driving over them (stepping on a phone), is most likely. Until final assembly (putting in a frame and adding the mass of the battery), at least. Then the 20' (2 story) drop and land on a corner is the real world fracture test, as the mass and the 'inability' to flex will create stress waves you can't simulate 'by hand'.
and now Apple can focus on something that to prevent scratches, dings and dents on the back.
If you tend to abuse your stuff (apparently so, as my two year old iPhone 5 has been carried daily, with only a film screensaver (front and back), and has suffered none of the dings and dents you describe) I would suggest you put it in a "protective case". Available virtually everywhere, they range from a couple dollars for minimal cases to around 60-80 for fully sealed waterproof cases (I do run a life proof case when we (my family) visit water parks)
Apple can not (and should not) design for the lowest common denominator (i.e. the person who subjects their phone to water and abuse) because it is easy to add the desired protection (and scaleable i.e. waterproof, uber-impactresistant etc.) and for people who want (and are careful enough to) carry their phone in it's most svelte and elemental form can do that also.
You did miss the point. THERE IS NO NEED FOR ANY COATING. SO THERE WILL NOT BE A COATING TO SCRATCH. Does caps help?
Also, I'm not sure why all of the rumor sites keep stating that Sapphire is less transparent than glass now that I think of it. It allows more light through than standard silicon glass and indeed allows more wavelengths than the human eye can detect. That's not the case with silicon glass. I keep wondering why these sites post that it's not as good. ...oh, Gurman probably stated something like that and it's just being parroted.
Here's my all caps, hope it helps: UNLESS YOU WORK AT APPLE AND CAN VERIFY THAT THEY ARENT USING A COATING THEN ITS IRRELEVANT IF YOU THINK IT NEEDS ONE OR NOT. I AGREE THAT IT DOESNT NEED ONE, but with them patenting a coating for sapphire it's at least likely that they will put it on the sapphire screens. Since this site is all about speculation based on patents and other sources you should at least entertain the possibility that Apple isn't going to care whether or not YOU think it needs it.
That anti-smudge coating, called an oleophobic coating, won't adhere to sapphire, that's true. So Apple is adding a layer of silica glass on top of the sapphire, to which the oleophobic coating will adhere. But wait, you may say, wouldn't that defeat the scratch resistance of the sapphire if the very top layer has to be glass anyway? Well yes, it would, except that this top layer of silica glass would be laid down via a method such as chemical vapor deposition, allowing it to be just a few molecules thick. Enough for the oleophobic coating to adhere too, but so thin that any scratches to it, which would stop at the sapphire layer below it, would be so shallow as to be completely invisible to the human eye. Neat trick.
Thank you, for both understanding what I'm talking about and shedding some more light on it. Glad to hear it's very thin and won't be noticeable. With that said I'll be looking forward to the new sapphire screens.
You missed the point of my statement. The purpose was to show that money has no value, which is exactly what you said.
Edit: I'm not against making money per say. The lack of regard for other people was what I was answering. However, money is a faith. It's not an absolute intrinsic value.
No, money has no value in your scenario as it has no value. It is not based on gold or any other material. It is not based on a governments ability to pay that value. In your scenario, it is simply paper. Now, if that was Water World, paper is highly valued
I have a secret for you. Human life, to this planet, is worth exactly as much per kilogram as every other form of mammalian life. A kilogram of biomass is a kilogram of biomass. We're not special and more deserving than other species around us. So the word inhumane, especially in the context you are using, is a bit human-centric and far from the reality of the universe we share. Just as a corporation would deny a being (in this case a human) the benefit of its efforts without equal compensation, so too do we all, in our daily lives of conspicuous consumption of this planet's resources, take for ourselves and thereby deny the other equally deserving creatures those resources, with no equal compensation. Know what you speak of when you attempt to bring the full light of reality to others.
Human language and the words we use, such as humane/inhumane, have 0 relevance to our planet. Our planet, as amazing as it is, is useless without us. It is not self aware. The reason a human life is of far more value than any other form of life on earth is because of our capacity to reason. The beauty of the most spectacular, natural formation, is useless without a human being present to view it and there by contemplate its beauty. To say we are not special, or more deserving, than any other species, is quite laughable. Do you know of any other species on earth that is capable of transporting itself to the moon? Can any of them tell us their life's history, let alone, maintain historic accounts of their ancestors? What species, is capable of creating the Sistine Chapel?
No one believes that a person should not be rewarded for their hard work. It's just that their are many who don't strictly equate reward, with monetary gain. For me, knowing I could save the life of someone else's father/mother/son/daughter, would be a reward all it's own. What is the point of saving a life if you don't care about a life? If I discovered a cure for cancer tomorrow, I would immediately look for a way to make it accesable to all. Would I make some money from it? Yes, I'd be able to support myself and my family, but not at the expense of denying any human being access to life. People would pay, what they can afford. If all you could afford, was a genuine smile, and a sincere thank you, then that is what it would cost to cure your cancer. If you can drop $2,000,000 like regular people drop pennies, than you will certainly pay more money for the cure, but it won't cost you any more than it cost the person whose sole possession is a cardboard box.
All good and well. But how is Apple going to recycle* the unbreakable saphire glass?
(*) The Lifespan of an iPhone is only 12 months until the next generation pops up, 48 months until you can't update your phone with the latest iOS.
My point is:
Shouldn't it be better to make the iPhone waterproof instead? That'd be a useful feature relevant to everyday life (It's raining right now in Belgium). Having unbreakable glass that can withstand 1 ton sounds like a gimmick to me. My iPhone slips back in my pocket if I don't use it.
Shouldn't it be better to make the iPhone waterproof instead? That'd be a useful feature relevant to everyday life (It's raining right now in Belgium). Having unbreakable glass that can withstand 1 ton sounds like a gimmick to me. My iPhone slips back in my pocket if I don't use it.
This is called "moving the goalposts."
Broken screen repairs are very common, and not just on iPhones. Having unbreakable glass is not a "gimmick." It's called addressing the most common reason to repair iPhones.
I'm psyched. Sapphire is incredible stuff. My 30-year old rolex is as shiny as the day it was new.
I'm pretty good with my Apple kit. I've had iPods/iPhones/iPads for years and they've left my hands scratch free. Except my iPhone 4S. I think someone drug a key across it and vandalized it. The scratch drove me nuts. Sapphire is a huge step up from GG.
Comments
I guess if people don't chuck their iPhones in the middle of a highly trafficked road, then they should be ok!
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
I hope so, because I dropped my iPhone 4 on the sidewalk and it totally spiderwebbed the screen.
I gave the Apple store $169 to "repair" it and they gave me another one. That one landed on the street but avoided being run over. Aside from a chip in the metal "frame" it seemed okay. At least the screen didn't break anyway.
Then it started to trave houble. It became confused. The email app would open but it couldn't seem to remember where the messages were located. I tried responding to a text message b u t it lagg ed beh wh at I ws typ then it rebooted all on its own.
After three solid minutes of the white apple screen it shut itself off. Five seconds later it came back on. Another three minutes of white apple, then it shut off again. Then it came on again. It did that cycle continuously until i could get an appointment with a Genius at the Apple Store who determined that there were internal injuries and the patient could not be resuscitated. I gave him another $169 plus tax to "repair" it and they gave me another one.
If this trend continues, I should be able to find a way to destroy this one by making it burst into flames.
The point of the essay: The outside of the iPhone is pretty tough already. While I did manage to smash one screen, the second incident demonstrates that even existing iPhones are able to retain structural integrity after impacts that turn the guts to moosh. Maybe what they REALLY need is chips and boards with better impact resistance!
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Also of interest to me is the possibility that they are using a technique of thermally precompressing (quasi tempering) the material to help prevent brittle fracture. This could make the material effectively harder than regular saphire. Can't wait to get hands on with it...
Hopefully this impressive material will make iPhones virtually unbreakable - from the front anyways. I suspect it will drive a real push on graphene development. It will be a materials arms race if sorts.
I guess if people don't chuck their iPhones in the middle of a highly trafficked road, then they should be ok!
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
More to the point, I hope it isn't in my pocket when it happens!
I guess you haven't gone back and read all his posts then. If so you'd be used to his inhumane views by now ...
Regarding that video you posted, have you ever Googled the heat shield tiles used on the space shuttle? They withstand temperatures 20 times higher than the torch used to heat that material painted on the egg in the video you posted. I've seen videos of a small cube of shuttle heat tile material blasted with enormous temperatures, then immediately handled by bare human hands. The stuff just doesn't absorb heat. So this guy was either using a form of the same stuff, or he invented it and now you know what it went on to be used for.
I have a secret for you. Human life, to this planet, is worth exactly as much per kilogram as every other form of mammalian life. A kilogram of biomass is a kilogram of biomass. We're not special and more deserving than other species around us. So the word inhumane, especially in the context you are using, is a bit human-centric and far from the reality of the universe we share. Just as a corporation would deny a being (in this case a human) the benefit of its efforts without equal compensation, so too do we all, in our daily lives of conspicuous consumption of this planet's resources, take for ourselves and thereby deny the other equally deserving creatures those resources, with no equal compensation. Know what you speak of when you attempt to bring the full light of reality to others.
That anti-smudge coating, called an oleophobic coating, won't adhere to sapphire, that's true. So Apple is adding a layer of silica glass on top of the sapphire, to which the oleophobic coating will adhere. But wait, you may say, wouldn't that defeat the scratch resistance of the sapphire if the very top layer has to be glass anyway? Well yes, it would, except that this top layer of silica glass would be laid down via a method such as chemical vapor deposition, allowing it to be just a few molecules thick. Enough for the oleophobic coating to adhere too, but so thin that any scratches to it, which would stop at the sapphire layer below it, would be so shallow as to be completely invisible to the human eye. Neat trick.
See my comment just above this one regarding the way Apple will add a layer above the sapphire to which the oleophobic coating will adhere. This patent speaks to the same issue of adding a layer on top of the sapphire, not adhering an oleophobic coating directly to sapphire, as that's just not chemically possible.
Hardware patents are "less evil" when it only covers uniqueness of a product, and doesn't prevent a standard from being established. Many of the reasons patents get a bad rap are regarding bad-faith patents (almost entirely dealing with software algorithms and not uniqueness.) For example, the LZW algorithm AFTER it had widespread use in the gif file format. There is no way to re-implement a mathematical algorithm without remaining compatible with other versions of it. It's like having a patent on 1+1=2. The more complex an algorithm is, the less useful a patent on it makes it. Instead it encourages coming up with alternatives that don't utilize the patent in question. In my opinion as long as something is "new" and can be demonstrated as such, fine patent away. But math isn't an invention. People can come up with exactly the same algorithm independently.
Industrial design patents cover the "look" of something. These are a bit more questionable because Apple could theoretically patent an "all-glass" phone or computer and use that as leverage alone.
It says right in the manual that the Oleophobic coating will wear off over time and not to use any cleaning solutions on the device to preserve it as long as possible. I'm actually rather impressed that I can just rub my hand on it and the screen becomes clean.
It could be faked but my gut is saying it isn't.
Agreed. While I'll need an interpretation of the spoken word, I can easily see where one pebble under a screen (middle right) causing the necessary fulcrum point to cause failure, especially the fracture pattern shown. In all the other cracking tests, the stresses are either distributed, or have rebound (kinetic point in time impact as opposed to an inelastic constant increasing stress).
3 comments
1) it appears that you can get iPhone 6 screens pretty readily.... This makes me think it's an approved 'leak' by Apple (isn't Apple / GT making these and shipping them over to China?... I would assume that inventory control at the assembly plant at this moment while doing assembly testing and building QA systems for regulatory testing. The counts of parts in/parts out can't be more than a couple thousand a day, and a small set of people handling them.
Meaning, that Apple anticipated this Corning Campaign and wants the videos to go viral.
Either that or a box of them got stolen en route.
2) Of all the tests, driving over them (stepping on a phone), is most likely. Until final assembly (putting in a frame and adding the mass of the battery), at least. Then the 20' (2 story) drop and land on a corner is the real world fracture test, as the mass and the 'inability' to flex will create stress waves you can't simulate 'by hand'.
Good!
and now Apple can focus on something that to prevent scratches, dings and dents on the back.
If you tend to abuse your stuff (apparently so, as my two year old iPhone 5 has been carried daily, with only a film screensaver (front and back), and has suffered none of the dings and dents you describe) I would suggest you put it in a "protective case". Available virtually everywhere, they range from a couple dollars for minimal cases to around 60-80 for fully sealed waterproof cases (I do run a life proof case when we (my family) visit water parks)
Apple can not (and should not) design for the lowest common denominator (i.e. the person who subjects their phone to water and abuse) because it is easy to add the desired protection (and scaleable i.e. waterproof, uber-impactresistant etc.) and for people who want (and are careful enough to) carry their phone in it's most svelte and elemental form can do that also.
Here's my all caps, hope it helps: UNLESS YOU WORK AT APPLE AND CAN VERIFY THAT THEY ARENT USING A COATING THEN ITS IRRELEVANT IF YOU THINK IT NEEDS ONE OR NOT. I AGREE THAT IT DOESNT NEED ONE, but with them patenting a coating for sapphire it's at least likely that they will put it on the sapphire screens. Since this site is all about speculation based on patents and other sources you should at least entertain the possibility that Apple isn't going to care whether or not YOU think it needs it.
Thank you, for both understanding what I'm talking about and shedding some more light on it. Glad to hear it's very thin and won't be noticeable. With that said I'll be looking forward to the new sapphire screens.
You missed the point of my statement. The purpose was to show that money has no value, which is exactly what you said.
Edit: I'm not against making money per say. The lack of regard for other people was what I was answering. However, money is a faith. It's not an absolute intrinsic value.
No, money has no value in your scenario as it has no value. It is not based on gold or any other material. It is not based on a governments ability to pay that value. In your scenario, it is simply paper. Now, if that was Water World, paper is highly valued
Human language and the words we use, such as humane/inhumane, have 0 relevance to our planet. Our planet, as amazing as it is, is useless without us. It is not self aware. The reason a human life is of far more value than any other form of life on earth is because of our capacity to reason. The beauty of the most spectacular, natural formation, is useless without a human being present to view it and there by contemplate its beauty. To say we are not special, or more deserving, than any other species, is quite laughable. Do you know of any other species on earth that is capable of transporting itself to the moon? Can any of them tell us their life's history, let alone, maintain historic accounts of their ancestors? What species, is capable of creating the Sistine Chapel?
No one believes that a person should not be rewarded for their hard work. It's just that their are many who don't strictly equate reward, with monetary gain. For me, knowing I could save the life of someone else's father/mother/son/daughter, would be a reward all it's own. What is the point of saving a life if you don't care about a life? If I discovered a cure for cancer tomorrow, I would immediately look for a way to make it accesable to all. Would I make some money from it? Yes, I'd be able to support myself and my family, but not at the expense of denying any human being access to life. People would pay, what they can afford. If all you could afford, was a genuine smile, and a sincere thank you, then that is what it would cost to cure your cancer. If you can drop $2,000,000 like regular people drop pennies, than you will certainly pay more money for the cure, but it won't cost you any more than it cost the person whose sole possession is a cardboard box.
All good and well. But how is Apple going to recycle* the unbreakable saphire glass?
(*) The Lifespan of an iPhone is only 12 months until the next generation pops up, 48 months until you can't update your phone with the latest iOS.
My point is:
Shouldn't it be better to make the iPhone waterproof instead? That'd be a useful feature relevant to everyday life (It's raining right now in Belgium). Having unbreakable glass that can withstand 1 ton sounds like a gimmick to me. My iPhone slips back in my pocket if I don't use it.
My point is:
Shouldn't it be better to make the iPhone waterproof instead? That'd be a useful feature relevant to everyday life (It's raining right now in Belgium). Having unbreakable glass that can withstand 1 ton sounds like a gimmick to me. My iPhone slips back in my pocket if I don't use it.
This is called "moving the goalposts."
Broken screen repairs are very common, and not just on iPhones. Having unbreakable glass is not a "gimmick." It's called addressing the most common reason to repair iPhones.
OFFICIAL IPHONE USE CASE
If you are not using your iPhone like this,
you are not using your iPhone correctly.
They already have. It’s called TAKING CARE OF YOUR POSSESSIONS.
I'm psyched. Sapphire is incredible stuff. My 30-year old rolex is as shiny as the day it was new.
I'm pretty good with my Apple kit. I've had iPods/iPhones/iPads for years and they've left my hands scratch free. Except my iPhone 4S. I think someone drug a key across it and vandalized it. The scratch drove me nuts. Sapphire is a huge step up from GG.