Did anyone ever confirm Apple used Gorilla Glass for the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus?
Confirm? Well Apple does not disclose its component suppliers, so officially, no. But the rumor mill has its own "unofficial truth" which is that Apple uses GG3 in those products.
Apple doesn't disclose specific component suppliers, but the company has been using strengthened Gorilla Glass in all iPhone models since the first-generation device debuted in 2007.
The iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus are believed to use Corning's Gorilla Glass 3, which debuted in early 2013 with improved scratch resistance over its predecessor. Apple does use sapphire instead of Gorilla Glass to protect the Touch ID fingerprint sensing home button on its iPhone and iPad lineups, as well as the rear camera lenses on some devices.
Yes the iphones all still use GG3 today, I am still of the belief that Sapphire was never intended for the phone, it was always for the watch, GT just put the screws to apple which force the delay of the watch to spring of this year I believe it was ready last fall, but with out the sapphire they had to wait, also they probably was going to put it on 100% of the watches, since most all watch over $300 usually have sapphire cystals, at least all the ones I have bought.
Don't know about that leap of supposition. The thick sapphire face is heavy (as compared to the GG which is a thin laminate over a polycarbonate substrate) In the sport watch weight is critical (hence the aluminum VS stainless body (which is also less durable)) I have a swiss chronograph which I wear nearly 24/7 -EXCEPT- when exercising. (and yes I am considering an Apple sport watch just for sport use)
I think it's more likely that the sport was always designed to have the polycarbonate / gorilla glass face.
Don't know about that leap of supposition. The thick sapphire face is heavy (as compared to the GG which is a thin laminate over a polycarbonate substrate) In the sport watch weight is critical (hence the aluminum VS stainless body (which is also less durable)) I have a swiss chronograph which I wear nearly 24/7 -EXCEPT- when exercising. (and yes I am considering an Apple sport watch just for sport use)
I think it's more likely that the sport was always designed to have the polycarbonate / gorilla glass face.
Actually I exercise all the time with my stainless steel apple watch, the weight it hardless noticable. AL watch if for those who can not afford stainless, making a polish stainless watch more expensive to make. Being that the watch is designed for people who are active you would want sapphire, verse GG. The reason I only buy watches with sapphire today is i got tire of breaking crystal from banging them into things. Being in the gym there is tendence for your arm to hit into metal objects.
This is a hilarious comment. "Sport" is clearly a marketing term for "entry level". If weight were so critical, how is it after shaving off the tiniest fractions of a gram by using Gorilla Glass instead of Sapphire, and Aluminum instead of Stainless steel, do they give it a band that weighs more than the Milanese Loop, or even the Stainless Steel Watch itself?
This is a hilarious comment. "Sport" is clearly a marketing term for "entry level". If weight were so critical, how is it after shaving off the tiniest fractions of a gram by using Gorilla Glass instead of Sapphire, and Aluminum instead of Stainless steel, do they give it a band that weighs more than the Milanese Loop, or even the Stainless Steel Watch itself?
You (obviously) have not held the two. The weight difference is considerable (Feels like double). And yes it matters.
Capitalism unleashed as it has been these past 25 years is having dire affects on our world. A lot of money is being made but who is paying the price for it all? Look at fast fashion which has realized that clothes made in the poorest countries in the world can allow them to sell new clothing retail in big western cities for under $10. Factories are sub-contractors and provide little to no concern to their workers health. In the USA labor unions have all been killed and the middle class has shrunk to Great Depression levels. Today you are either a white collar worker with a decent life or someone working in the service business perhaps working full time yet still in need of government assistance. Capitalism like all human inventions need oversight. Human behavior never changes unless laws are in place (and enforced) to keep the strong from crushing the week. Apple is a player in this time of international corporations which operate without any responsibility for contract workers abroad. If you doubt what I am saying check out the documentary "The True Cost". Billions upon billions do not come out of thin air, it comes from dramatically reducing cost to levels not possible in the west.
Yes I believe in capitalism, I own my own business.
You (obviously) have not held the two. The weight difference is considerable (Feels like double). And yes it matters.
Don't see how it is hilarious in any case.
It's hilarious because the use of the word "critical" is usually applied in professional situations -- "it's critical to get the engine tolerances perfect or there will be a catastrophic accident", not "it's critical Mom's shoes match her bag or she gets upset".
I have held them and felt the difference between the two. The Sport case at 30g weighs 20g less than the Stainless Steel at 50g. Negligible but still noticeable in a side by side comparison. And presumably most of that weight is the difference between aluminum and steel. But here's the rub -- the White Sport Band weighs 51g -- that's more than the Stainless Steel case alone! By comparison, the Black Classic Buckle weighs a mere 19g. So for a customer for whom every last gram is "critical", they're better off ditching the Sport band, and going with the Black Classic Buckle. It will save them more than the weight of the entire Sport Watch case!
But let's look at how the ?Watch is actually used -- the majority of the functions outside of keeping time, and some fitness measurements, require an iPhone. For the sake of argument, an iPhone weighs 129 grams. So in order to even make an ?Watch worth wearing, over some other lighter sports watch, a person has to carry a lot of extra weight. And this assumes the user will not be listening to music, requiring wireless headphones, in a situation where weight is so "critical".
And let's be clear, for weight to be "critical" in a sports watch, we're mainly talking about competitive runners or cyclists, who are so concerned about weight they shave their legs and heads to lower wind resistance for what they must carry, and getting their gear down to the bare minimums necessary. And even then we're talking in competition situations. Generally in training an athlete wants more resistance, which gives them greater endurance without it in competition. When 20g starts making a difference, then a watch band that weighs more than the watch is going to be one of the first things thrown out. Which means, they aren't going to be carrying their iPhones, or wearing even earbuds either.
So let's not kid ourselves -- while Apple markets the watch in part for it's light weight, they didn't design it for "critical" use by professional athletes who might be affected by such subtle weight concerns. They designed it out of aluminum because aluminum is a cheaper metal and costs less to mill, than quality stainless steel. They used Gorilla Glass because it costs less than sapphire. All of this provides the net impact of lowering the cost to sell more watches without compromising style or features. If Apple seriously was concerned about designing a watch for competitive runners and cyclists, they would have at least offered one optional band for the Sport which weighed less than the watch case itself. As it is, Apple was so unconcerned about their entry-level Sport Watch, it only has one intended band choice, albeit with some color options -- none of which is "critical" to the weight issues. Well that's not true, the black Sport Band weighs 11g less than the White Sport Band for some reason. So I guess any "serious" athlete concerned by weight will only wear the Black Sport Band, which only weighs 10g more than the Sport Watch case itself. Or better yet, strap it on with cellophane. But ultimately, it's strictly a marketing angle -- otherwise what are they going to say? That it's made with cheaper materials than the stainless Watch so more people can afford it without sacrificing profit? Of course not, they didn't so that with the 5C which clearly had no other reason for being made out of plastic.
So while I'm not saying you're wrong about weight being a concern for a competitive athlete in their performance gear (and you're not), it's not so much a real concern with respect to the target demographic for Apple's Sport Watch, as evidenced by the decisions Apple has made, and it's definitely not "critical".
Wow that's a lot of (self (or un)supported) supposition.
Weight of the watch (not the band so much) IS critical. You obviously don't do sport (cyclists don't shave their legs and heads for weight BTW (same for competitive swimmers))
The weight of the iPhone (in a pack or jersey pocket) is trivial. What is not is the heavy watch bouncing against your wrist. I don't wear my normal watch (swiss chrono with stainless link band) because of the battering my wrist takes. I have used several plastic "sport watches" which work ok, but not nearly the functionality I could get with the sport Apple Watch and resin band. (and I do normally bring my iPhone on training rides (again weight in a jersey pocket or seat pouch IS NOT the same as it jouncing on your wrist))
You do realize you are arguing my opinions and experience of nearly 30 year of competitive cycling. I have to tell you It is a fools errand you have undertaken my friend. Anyone who does, knows that.
Comments
Confirm? Well Apple does not disclose its component suppliers, so officially, no. But the rumor mill has its own "unofficial truth" which is that Apple uses GG3 in those products.
Yes the iphones all still use GG3 today, I am still of the belief that Sapphire was never intended for the phone, it was always for the watch, GT just put the screws to apple which force the delay of the watch to spring of this year I believe it was ready last fall, but with out the sapphire they had to wait, also they probably was going to put it on 100% of the watches, since most all watch over $300 usually have sapphire cystals, at least all the ones I have bought.
Don't know about that leap of supposition. The thick sapphire face is heavy (as compared to the GG which is a thin laminate over a polycarbonate substrate) In the sport watch weight is critical (hence the aluminum VS stainless body (which is also less durable)) I have a swiss chronograph which I wear nearly 24/7 -EXCEPT- when exercising. (and yes I am considering an Apple sport watch just for sport use)
I think it's more likely that the sport was always designed to have the polycarbonate / gorilla glass face.
Nice to know Apple supports Putin's government and has no ethical problem doing business with a country the US has sanctions against.
Don't know about that leap of supposition. The thick sapphire face is heavy (as compared to the GG which is a thin laminate over a polycarbonate substrate) In the sport watch weight is critical (hence the aluminum VS stainless body (which is also less durable)) I have a swiss chronograph which I wear nearly 24/7 -EXCEPT- when exercising. (and yes I am considering an Apple sport watch just for sport use)
I think it's more likely that the sport was always designed to have the polycarbonate / gorilla glass face.
Actually I exercise all the time with my stainless steel apple watch, the weight it hardless noticable. AL watch if for those who can not afford stainless, making a polish stainless watch more expensive to make. Being that the watch is designed for people who are active you would want sapphire, verse GG. The reason I only buy watches with sapphire today is i got tire of breaking crystal from banging them into things. Being in the gym there is tendence for your arm to hit into metal objects.
In the sport watch weight is critical
This is a hilarious comment. "Sport" is clearly a marketing term for "entry level". If weight were so critical, how is it after shaving off the tiniest fractions of a gram by using Gorilla Glass instead of Sapphire, and Aluminum instead of Stainless steel, do they give it a band that weighs more than the Milanese Loop, or even the Stainless Steel Watch itself?
Nice to know Apple supports Putin's government and has no ethical problem doing business with a country the US has sanctions against.
You don't believe in free capitalism?
You some kinda socialist or sumt'n?
This is a hilarious comment. "Sport" is clearly a marketing term for "entry level". If weight were so critical, how is it after shaving off the tiniest fractions of a gram by using Gorilla Glass instead of Sapphire, and Aluminum instead of Stainless steel, do they give it a band that weighs more than the Milanese Loop, or even the Stainless Steel Watch itself?
You (obviously) have not held the two. The weight difference is considerable (Feels like double). And yes it matters.
Don't see how it is hilarious in any case.
Do you have any fcuking idea of the nature of the sanctions that the E.U. and the U.S. have imposed against Russia?
Why don't you educate yourself before spouting off.
Too bad Apple has to rely on countries like China and Russia.
Does anyone rely on Russia for anything and actually sleep well at night?
I mean really, there is no other technically advanced country as unreliable as Russia.
Apple relies on China as well. Oh and they start business in the Far East.
And if you're worried about Apple relying on "such" countries you might want to ask yourself why local businesses are not competitive.
Capitalism unleashed as it has been these past 25 years is having dire affects on our world. A lot of money is being made but who is paying the price for it all? Look at fast fashion which has realized that clothes made in the poorest countries in the world can allow them to sell new clothing retail in big western cities for under $10. Factories are sub-contractors and provide little to no concern to their workers health. In the USA labor unions have all been killed and the middle class has shrunk to Great Depression levels. Today you are either a white collar worker with a decent life or someone working in the service business perhaps working full time yet still in need of government assistance. Capitalism like all human inventions need oversight. Human behavior never changes unless laws are in place (and enforced) to keep the strong from crushing the week. Apple is a player in this time of international corporations which operate without any responsibility for contract workers abroad. If you doubt what I am saying check out the documentary "The True Cost". Billions upon billions do not come out of thin air, it comes from dramatically reducing cost to levels not possible in the west.
Yes I believe in capitalism, I own my own business.
You (obviously) have not held the two. The weight difference is considerable (Feels like double). And yes it matters.
Don't see how it is hilarious in any case.
It's hilarious because the use of the word "critical" is usually applied in professional situations -- "it's critical to get the engine tolerances perfect or there will be a catastrophic accident", not "it's critical Mom's shoes match her bag or she gets upset".
I have held them and felt the difference between the two. The Sport case at 30g weighs 20g less than the Stainless Steel at 50g. Negligible but still noticeable in a side by side comparison. And presumably most of that weight is the difference between aluminum and steel. But here's the rub -- the White Sport Band weighs 51g -- that's more than the Stainless Steel case alone! By comparison, the Black Classic Buckle weighs a mere 19g. So for a customer for whom every last gram is "critical", they're better off ditching the Sport band, and going with the Black Classic Buckle. It will save them more than the weight of the entire Sport Watch case!
But let's look at how the ?Watch is actually used -- the majority of the functions outside of keeping time, and some fitness measurements, require an iPhone. For the sake of argument, an iPhone weighs 129 grams. So in order to even make an ?Watch worth wearing, over some other lighter sports watch, a person has to carry a lot of extra weight. And this assumes the user will not be listening to music, requiring wireless headphones, in a situation where weight is so "critical".
And let's be clear, for weight to be "critical" in a sports watch, we're mainly talking about competitive runners or cyclists, who are so concerned about weight they shave their legs and heads to lower wind resistance for what they must carry, and getting their gear down to the bare minimums necessary. And even then we're talking in competition situations. Generally in training an athlete wants more resistance, which gives them greater endurance without it in competition. When 20g starts making a difference, then a watch band that weighs more than the watch is going to be one of the first things thrown out. Which means, they aren't going to be carrying their iPhones, or wearing even earbuds either.
So let's not kid ourselves -- while Apple markets the watch in part for it's light weight, they didn't design it for "critical" use by professional athletes who might be affected by such subtle weight concerns. They designed it out of aluminum because aluminum is a cheaper metal and costs less to mill, than quality stainless steel. They used Gorilla Glass because it costs less than sapphire. All of this provides the net impact of lowering the cost to sell more watches without compromising style or features. If Apple seriously was concerned about designing a watch for competitive runners and cyclists, they would have at least offered one optional band for the Sport which weighed less than the watch case itself. As it is, Apple was so unconcerned about their entry-level Sport Watch, it only has one intended band choice, albeit with some color options -- none of which is "critical" to the weight issues. Well that's not true, the black Sport Band weighs 11g less than the White Sport Band for some reason. So I guess any "serious" athlete concerned by weight will only wear the Black Sport Band, which only weighs 10g more than the Sport Watch case itself. Or better yet, strap it on with cellophane. But ultimately, it's strictly a marketing angle -- otherwise what are they going to say? That it's made with cheaper materials than the stainless Watch so more people can afford it without sacrificing profit? Of course not, they didn't so that with the 5C which clearly had no other reason for being made out of plastic.
So while I'm not saying you're wrong about weight being a concern for a competitive athlete in their performance gear (and you're not), it's not so much a real concern with respect to the target demographic for Apple's Sport Watch, as evidenced by the decisions Apple has made, and it's definitely not "critical".
Good business has no time for partisanship, family or/and tribal loyalty; fool me once shame om you. fool me twice...
Wow that's a lot of (self (or un)supported) supposition.
Weight of the watch (not the band so much) IS critical. You obviously don't do sport (cyclists don't shave their legs and heads for weight BTW (same for competitive swimmers))
The weight of the iPhone (in a pack or jersey pocket) is trivial. What is not is the heavy watch bouncing against your wrist. I don't wear my normal watch (swiss chrono with stainless link band) because of the battering my wrist takes. I have used several plastic "sport watches" which work ok, but not nearly the functionality I could get with the sport Apple Watch and resin band. (and I do normally bring my iPhone on training rides (again weight in a jersey pocket or seat pouch IS NOT the same as it jouncing on your wrist))
You do realize you are arguing my opinions and experience of nearly 30 year of competitive cycling. I have to tell you It is a fools errand you have undertaken my friend. Anyone who does, knows that.