Corning unveils Gorilla Glass Victus with enhanced drop, scratch resistance

AppleInsider

Long-time Apple supplier Corning has unveiled a new and much more durable version of its popular Gorilla Glass product, dubbed Gorilla Glass Victus.

Credit: Corning

In a YouTube video announcing the product, Corning says that smartphones equipped with Gorilla Glass Victus will be receive considerable improvements to both drop and scratch resistance over the previous Gorilla Glass 6 material.

For example, Gorilla Glass Victus was able to survive 2-meter drops in lab testing. In a Knoop Diamond Scratch Test, it's able to withstand an 8 Newton Load -- significantly higher than the average 2 to 4 rating for competing glasses.

Of course, the glass won't be invulnerable to scratches, particularly when a device is in a pocket with bits of sand or metal. While Corning's Jaymin Amin admitted that harsh environments could still cause a scratch, he said that Gorilla Glass Victus would "reduce those instances quite dramatically."

Interestingly, Amin told The Verge that at least one manufacturer realized that Gorilla Glass Victus' improvements over Gorilla Glass 6 could lead to thinner devices. That unnamed manufacturer said it's opting to put a thinner layer of the new glass, instead of maximizing durability.

Apple uses Gorilla Glass in its devices, and Corning has been the recipient of Apple's Advanced Manufacturing Fund.

Samsung will be the first device maker to introduce a product with Gorilla Glass Victus, with a new device coming "in the next few months." There's no word on when Apple will adopt it for iPhone.

commentzilla

I'd prefer more durability so I can stop buying screen protectors and cases.

melgross

Every new version is billed as being much more durable. But guess what, they break just about as much.  Resistance to breakage is more do to the design of the phone itself, with the rubber gasket IG protecting the glass from sudden shock, and whether the glass will hit something directly when dropped.

strangedays

melgross said:

Every new version is billed as being much more durable. But guess what, they break just about as much.  Resistance to breakage is more do to the design of the phone itself, with the rubber gasket IG protecting the glass from sudden shock, and whether the glass will hit something directly when dropped.

They don’t tho. Watching the drop tests of newer iPhones you can see them surviving crazy falls. 

laytech

my iPhone 11 Pro back glass cracked effortlessly, the front has scratches all over it. Yet, it has never been dropped. I strongly suspect my glass is from a previous iPhone can't possibly be 11 Pro glass. If this new glass is as good as it claims then all the better. 

ramanpfaff

Same story every year. Same result every year. Broken/cracked/scratched screens for so many of my friends. I'm pretty lucky and have never dropped my iPhone. Fingers crossed.

rayz2016

StrangeDays said:

melgross said:

Every new version is billed as being much more durable. But guess what, they break just about as much.  Resistance to breakage is more do to the design of the phone itself, with the rubber gasket IG protecting the glass from sudden shock, and whether the glass will hit something directly when dropped.

They don’t tho. Watching the drop tests of newer iPhones you can see them surviving crazy falls. 

The problem is if the phone lands on one corner. If this happens the screen will crack from one edge to the other. Hope this new stuff is better. 

A case with a raised screen face  and shock-absorbent corners will do the trick. 

dewme

I wonder how many decades worth of these incremental improvements Corning has queued up? It seems uncanny that their improvement cycles so closely resemble the upgrade steps of the major smartphone manufacturers. You’d think that they would establish a specific target and then work towards meeting the target no matter how long it took, or with a maximum investment limit in place, kind of like President Kennedy’s goal to get to the moon by the end of the decade. With Corning it seems like they’re okay with only getting halfway to the moon (where getting to the moon equates to no more cracked screens) in half the time as long as they keep getting paid for only getting halfway to the target that everyone really wants. Overly pessimistic perhaps, but it sure feels like intentional incrementalism. 

retrogusto

Wow, that Corning guy needs to take video lessons from Andrew. It’s like he’s addressing a mentally impaired child. And it seems to me that screen breakage is a much bigger problem than scratching, although I’ve never really experienced either, despite having not used a case since my iPhone 3G. 

macpro

When is someone going to start heating and pressuring pure carbon to make a large flat, thin diamond screen eh? /kidding

edited July 2020

melgross

StrangeDays said:

melgross said:

Every new version is billed as being much more durable. But guess what, they break just about as much.  Resistance to breakage is more do to the design of the phone itself, with the rubber gasket IG protecting the glass from sudden shock, and whether the glass will hit something directly when dropped.

They don’t tho. Watching the drop tests of newer iPhones you can see them surviving crazy falls. 

And a lot of that is the design.

melgross

MacPro said:

When is someone going to start heating and pressuring pure carbon to make a large flat, thin diamond screen eh? /kidding

I’ve thought that a screen could be made from layered soft glass and deposited diamond. The glass would move. The way layers of clam shells move, slight slippage prevents breaking. Obviously it would cost more, but I wonder by how much. The layers could be very thin. The diamond top layer only needs to be a few thousands thick. The entire piece could be a tenth as thick as now, while being flexible and obviously, on the surface, hard

mplsp

StrangeDays said:

melgross said:

Every new version is billed as being much more durable. But guess what, they break just about as much.  Resistance to breakage is more do to the design of the phone itself, with the rubber gasket IG protecting the glass from sudden shock, and whether the glass will hit something directly when dropped.

They don’t tho. Watching the drop tests of newer iPhones you can see them surviving crazy falls. 

And then others break for seemingly no reason at all - the screen on my brother in law’s iPhone broke a couple years ago after falling 3 feet onto a carpeted surface despite having a case. There are a lot of seemingly random variables that determine whether a screen breaks. A slight change in the angle of impact can have a significant effect on how much it flexes, leading to cracking. Small chips and micro fractures from previous damage that are otherwise unnoticeable can also cause an otherwise minor stress to break a screen. Ultimately, the best gauge would probably be statistics from Apple repair centers since they would reflect real-world use and damage rates. 

I’m happy with any improvement they make - especially since we’re stuck with glass backs now, too. I’ve never broken a screen on any of my iPhones going back to the 3G, but within 2 weeks of getting my Xs I cracked the back, despite having a silicone case on it.

dysamoria

commentzilla said:

I'd prefer more durability so I can stop buying screen protectors and cases.

Apple would have to also make their phones more ergonomic to stop us requiring cases. I have a case not because I drop things a lot. I have a case because the phone is slippery and far too thin to be comfortable in my hand.

dysamoria

dewme said:

I wonder how many decades worth of these incremental improvements Corning has queued up? It seems uncanny that their improvement cycles so closely resemble the upgrade steps of the major smartphone manufacturers. You’d think that they would establish a specific target and then work towards meeting the target no matter how long it took, or with a maximum investment limit in place, kind of like President Kennedy’s goal to get to the moon by the end of the decade. With Corning it seems like they’re okay with only getting halfway to the moon (where getting to the moon equates to no more cracked screens) in half the time as long as they keep getting paid for only getting halfway to the target that everyone really wants. Overly pessimistic perhaps, but it sure feels like intentional incrementalism. 

Yeah. Welcome to the tech industry and end-stage American laissez-faire capitalism... 

macpro

melgross said:

MacPro said:

When is someone going to start heating and pressuring pure carbon to make a large flat, thin diamond screen eh? /kidding

I’ve thought that a screen could be made from layered soft glass and deposited diamond. The glass would move. The way layers of clam shells move, slight slippage prevents breaking. Obviously it would cost more, but I wonder by how much. The layers could be very thin. The diamond top layer only needs to be a few thousands thick. The entire piece could be a tenth as thick as now, while being flexible and obviously, on the surface, hard

Just curious, how would you ensure individual diamond particles would not be refracting light in different directions?

spamsandwich

melgross said:

Every new version is billed as being much more durable. But guess what, they break just about as much.  Resistance to breakage is more do to the design of the phone itself, with the rubber gasket IG protecting the glass from sudden shock, and whether the glass will hit something directly when dropped.

Excellent points.

commentzilla

Rayz2016 said:

StrangeDays said:

melgross said:

Every new version is billed as being much more durable. But guess what, they break just about as much.  Resistance to breakage is more do to the design of the phone itself, with the rubber gasket IG protecting the glass from sudden shock, and whether the glass will hit something directly when dropped.

They don’t tho. Watching the drop tests of newer iPhones you can see them surviving crazy falls. 

The problem is if the phone lands on one corner. If this happens the screen will crack from one edge to the other. Hope this new stuff is better. 

A case with a raised screen face  and shock-absorbent corners will do the trick. 

A big part of the problem is the raised curved glass screens. The glass should be flush with the body of the phone to protect the corners, which is the easiest way to break the glass when it falls.

xed

melgross said:

Every new version is billed as being much more durable. But guess what, they break just about as much.  Resistance to breakage is more do to the design of the phone itself, with the rubber gasket IG protecting the glass from sudden shock, and whether the glass will hit something directly when dropped.

You acknowledge that "resistance to breakage is more do to the design of the phone itself" when it comes to the object after you claim that "they break just about as much" after pooh-poohing Cornings claims. There's no reason to believe to believe Corning is lying and it's foolish to hold Corning up to any vendor usage of their material.

It would be like Intel claiming that a new processor uses 50% less power for a specific task and then suggesting they're lying because a 15" MBP doesn't last twice as long. You know that the processor isn't the only use of energy just as you know that GG isn't the only material that can take or redirect an impact. For all we know, Apple is satisfied with the relative durability of GG so they're taking the bulk of the benefits to allow for thinner substrates and less cushioning in future products. That shouldn't reflect poorly on Corning.

melgross

MacPro said:

melgross said:

MacPro said:

When is someone going to start heating and pressuring pure carbon to make a large flat, thin diamond screen eh? /kidding

I’ve thought that a screen could be made from layered soft glass and deposited diamond. The glass would move. The way layers of clam shells move, slight slippage prevents breaking. Obviously it would cost more, but I wonder by how much. The layers could be very thin. The diamond top layer only needs to be a few thousands thick. The entire piece could be a tenth as thick as now, while being flexible and obviously, on the surface, hard

Just curious, how would you ensure individual diamond particles would not be refracting light in different directions?

They aren’t. It’s one large sheet of deposited carbon. Remember that glass itself isn’t even a crystal, and the molecular arrangements are random. Not considered to be the best for optical use. But as these are thin sheets, none of it matters.

melgross

Xed said:

melgross said:

Every new version is billed as being much more durable. But guess what, they break just about as much.  Resistance to breakage is more do to the design of the phone itself, with the rubber gasket IG protecting the glass from sudden shock, and whether the glass will hit something directly when dropped.

You acknowledge that "resistance to breakage is more do to the design of the phone itself" when it comes to the object after you claim that "they break just about as much" after pooh-poohing Cornings claims. There's no reason to believe to believe Corning is lying and it's foolish to hold Corning up to any vendor usage of their material.

It would be like Intel claiming that a new processor uses 50% less power for a specific task and then suggesting they're lying because a 15" MBP doesn't last twice as long. You know that the processor isn't the only use of energy just as you know that GG isn't the only material that can take or redirect an impact. For all we know, Apple is satisfied with the relative durability of GG so they're taking the bulk of the benefits to allow for thinner substrates and less cushioning in future products. That shouldn't reflect poorly on Corning.

If you ever see Corning’s tests of their  glass, you’ll notice that from the very first, the glass has bent remarkably, and had significant resistance to breakage, not only from that severe stress test, but also to the steel ball bounce test, and to the drop tests. But as we all know, real life use isn’t that wonderful.

we also have seen. Over the years, that different phones with the same glass have differing breakage rates. Apple and Samsung have shown significantly different breakage rates each year, despite using the same generation of glass. How do YOU explain that? It’s the design of the phone, the way the edges of the glass is rounded, the way the glass is glued to the frame, etc.

to deny all of this is showing that you don’t want to acknowledge any of it. I’m not saying that the glass isn’t itself getting slightly better each year. I have no doubt it is. But we’ve seen Corning state, before, that that year’s glass was significantly better than previously, only to see breakage rates about the same as before. How do you explain that, if it isn’t a matter of phone design?

i don’t really know just how much better this year’s glass actually is, and nobody here does. But the question is what manufacturers will do with it. If it’s better, will they use thinner glass? At least one manufacturer has already said that it’s what they will do.