Why does the headline call it a ban? So Apple doesn't want to sell screen protectors in their store, big deal. I don't think it really qualifies as a ban as that word connotes public condemnation. I doubt they are that passionate about it.
I think it's just sort of a mindless follow-on to all the talk of Apple banning apps from the app store. Apple, the company that bans stuff!
Which is much more fun than "elects to stop selling."
Same here. I have had all iPhones since launch day of first gen. I have never used a case and never used a protective screen film/cover. I carry my phone lose in my pocket. My iPhone's have always been immaculate and scratch free. I must say though the oleophobic coating added on the 3Gs is phenomenal, make a world of difference.
Are you implying that you can carry an iPhone in your pocket without a case and the plastic stays immaculate? Show me a picture of this non-cased immaculate iPhone please. Glass, maybe, but the soft plastic back...mmmmm...nope. I don't believe it.
My guess is that the "ban" on film protectors is more likely either because Apple has some data which shows that film protectors interfere with multitouch functionality or reduce the perceived image quality (e.g. contrast) of the display. Alternatively, it is also possible that films reduce heat dissipation by acting as thermal isolators which may not be good for the Phone.
Apple want's the best user expeience's. That is why they banned those.
Could it be that Apple is banning plastic film screen protectors because they require water/soap solution to install? What if Apple was finding that they were receiving an unusually high number of returns of new iPhones/Touches with "water damage" due to people having to learn how to install the thin film protectors (tricky maneuver requiring practice for the first timer) that require you to spray a soap solution onto the phone/touch to install the thin film? That liquid solution can easily seep behind the home button and damage the internal electronics of the iPhone/Touch. I know from personal experience.
Or has Apple decided not to cary products in their store that they feel are of questionable value?
There are tens of thousands of computer products that are not sold in Apple stores, many of them Apple centric. Why have you not reported on these "banned' products?
I think it's just sort of a mindless follow-on to all the talk of Apple banning apps from the app store. Apple, the company that bans stuff!
Which is much more fun than "elects to stop selling."
Indeed. Without thinking what it actually means, people just think Apple has to sell this stuff. You can get it anywhere else if you want it. Just because it's not in the Apple store...big deal. More than likely, all of this crap is cheaper elsewhere anyway.
Could it be that Apple is banning plastic film screen protectors because they require water/soap solution to install? What if Apple was finding that they were receiving an unusually high number of returns of new iPhones/Touches with "water damage" due to people having to learn how to install the thin film protectors (tricky maneuver requiring practice for the first timer) that require you to spray a soap solution onto the phone/touch to install the thin film? That liquid solution can easily seep behind the home button and damage the internal electronics of the iPhone/Touch. I know from personal experience.
I have used an anti-glare screen film since I got my 3G. It didn't need any water or soap to install. It's not window tint. There are static cling ones. They are able to be removed and reapplied easily.
Not the best move ever by Apple. People go into the Apple stores to buy things like this, and end up coming out with more expensive purchases. I went in to get a new iPhone screen cover (with the anti-glare) and ended up buying a Blue-Tooth keyboard on a whim for my mini.
This is totally false, or at best the existence of the "reports" is true, even though they have no basis in fact.
I think you should back this nonsense up or remove it from the article. We aren't Republican's here. You can't just repeat lies over and over until they are believed.
Nancy Pelosi? Come on Nancy, I know it's you! Hey, since I got you here in person, can you all please stop shoving nonsense bills down my throat without my consent? I mean I know you think you advanced yourself through your hard work & all but fact is you advance yourself only through the good graces of the American Public. Maybe you should listen to what we want instead of telling us what you think is best for us.
the reason's probably supporting these screen protector is creating a lot of unnecessary stress for their support staff. Can you imagine the line of people asking the Apple genius to remove some bubbles from their screen?
This is annoying because Apple had such a large selection, where as Best Buy or Walmart are quite limited.
And yes I scratched my iPod Touch within two weeks of getting, or should I say my cat did when he knocked it off the table. (Hardwood floor, and probably hit a grain of sand or dust that did the scratching).
So yes, some of us do like the extra protection that is provided. My iPhone is inside a sleve and also had a screen protector. I do no find it limits the touch experience whatsoever, but does provide peace of mind.
I put the emphasis in there to prove a point. Besides, what's the harm? If Apple chooses not to give shelf space to a product, the worst thing that can happen is that Apple's retail sales figures decline. Far more likely, their sales figures will remain constant or continue to follow whatever trend they're already following. It's not like they're going to take out those products and just leave the shelf space empty, after all.
Because it's not simply about one product. As I said, it's the impression that the Apple Store is a one-stop shop for everything you need. Now, maybe this isn't technically true -- I certainly don't "need" a case for my laptop, nor "need" all the software they sell there -- but that is part of the allure of the Apple Store for the average consumer. It's part of the "complete" experience that has made the Apple Stores so successful. I think Apple is underestimating people's desire for this particular product, and they will end up undermining the overall impression of the Apple Store because of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomfoolery
That's oversimplified to the point of being misleading. The oleophobic coating is a polymer that's chemically bonded to the glass. Calling it a plastic coating makes it sound like it's just smeared on. It's the difference between electroplating something and wrapping it in aluminum foil.
Okay, it's a scratchable polymer coating bonded on top of the unscratchable glass surface.
I wasn't intending to condemn the process or material used. I was condemning the fact that they added an additional coating -- that scratches -- on top of a surface that somewhat famously did not scratch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomfoolery
Incidentally, the idea that it scratches? Complete bunk.
I appreciate the detail with which you explained the process, btw -- I actually really love to understand the way a lot of these things work -- but real world usage situations indicate that it is not as cut and dried as perhaps Apple had hoped.
this despite widespread reports of scratches appearing quite easily on its handheld offerings for years.
Apple device screens are among the most durable and scratch-resistant you'll ever find. There's no actual need for any screen protection.
As for the ban, screen protection kind of defeats the purpose of oleophobic coatings, and does send the message that Apple's screens are in need of protection.
I've stopped using plastic screen protectors for my iPhone long ago, preferring a nice, thin, plastic/transparent backing. Works great.
Further, you can get your screen protectors elsewhere, just not in Apple Stores. No big deal.
I totally agree. I've been using my 3GS since the introduction without any films on the front panel and I do not have ANY scratch what so ever. Just wipe it couple of times with a nice cloth and it's good as new.
Not the best move ever by Apple. People go into the Apple stores to buy things like this, and end up coming out with more expensive purchases. I went in to get a new iPhone screen cover (with the anti-glare) and ended up buying a Blue-Tooth keyboard on a whim for my mini.
Why can't they just explain the move?
Probably because outside of sites such as this nobody really cares that much. Customers will ask after screen protectors, be told that Apple doesn't stock them, customers will say "Huh" and swing by Best Buy or order something online.
I doubt anyone is going to pitch a fit or demand an explanation.
I could not live without the screen coating. The screen is very durable but....all it takes is accidentally putting your iPhone in the same pocket as your keys and then rubbing them together and your screen is scratched - forever. Happened to me with two or three iPhones. Once the Scratch happens, it's all I see.
So a screen protector is the only way to go (for me) and it does not get in the way of the "experience".
Comments
Why does the headline call it a ban? So Apple doesn't want to sell screen protectors in their store, big deal. I don't think it really qualifies as a ban as that word connotes public condemnation. I doubt they are that passionate about it.
I think it's just sort of a mindless follow-on to all the talk of Apple banning apps from the app store. Apple, the company that bans stuff!
Which is much more fun than "elects to stop selling."
Same here. I have had all iPhones since launch day of first gen. I have never used a case and never used a protective screen film/cover. I carry my phone lose in my pocket. My iPhone's have always been immaculate and scratch free. I must say though the oleophobic coating added on the 3Gs is phenomenal, make a world of difference.
Are you implying that you can carry an iPhone in your pocket without a case and the plastic stays immaculate? Show me a picture of this non-cased immaculate iPhone please. Glass, maybe, but the soft plastic back...mmmmm...nope. I don't believe it.
My guess is that the "ban" on film protectors is more likely either because Apple has some data which shows that film protectors interfere with multitouch functionality or reduce the perceived image quality (e.g. contrast) of the display. Alternatively, it is also possible that films reduce heat dissipation by acting as thermal isolators which may not be good for the Phone.
Apple want's the best user expeience's. That is why they banned those.
Or has Apple decided not to cary products in their store that they feel are of questionable value?
There are tens of thousands of computer products that are not sold in Apple stores, many of them Apple centric. Why have you not reported on these "banned' products?
I think it's just sort of a mindless follow-on to all the talk of Apple banning apps from the app store. Apple, the company that bans stuff!
Which is much more fun than "elects to stop selling."
Indeed. Without thinking what it actually means, people just think Apple has to sell this stuff. You can get it anywhere else if you want it. Just because it's not in the Apple store...big deal. More than likely, all of this crap is cheaper elsewhere anyway.
Sounds like they search your iPhone when you go to the store and make you remove the screen protector before they let you in.
Commies!
Could it be that Apple is banning plastic film screen protectors because they require water/soap solution to install? What if Apple was finding that they were receiving an unusually high number of returns of new iPhones/Touches with "water damage" due to people having to learn how to install the thin film protectors (tricky maneuver requiring practice for the first timer) that require you to spray a soap solution onto the phone/touch to install the thin film? That liquid solution can easily seep behind the home button and damage the internal electronics of the iPhone/Touch. I know from personal experience.
I have used an anti-glare screen film since I got my 3G. It didn't need any water or soap to install. It's not window tint. There are static cling ones. They are able to be removed and reapplied easily.
Why can't they just explain the move?
This is totally false, or at best the existence of the "reports" is true, even though they have no basis in fact.
I think you should back this nonsense up or remove it from the article. We aren't Republican's here. You can't just repeat lies over and over until they are believed.
Nancy Pelosi? Come on Nancy, I know it's you! Hey, since I got you here in person, can you all please stop shoving nonsense bills down my throat without my consent? I mean I know you think you advanced yourself through your hard work & all but fact is you advance yourself only through the good graces of the American Public. Maybe you should listen to what we want instead of telling us what you think is best for us.
Why can't they just explain the move?
the reason's probably supporting these screen protector is creating a lot of unnecessary stress for their support staff. Can you imagine the line of people asking the Apple genius to remove some bubbles from their screen?
They were probably tired of complaints that they fall off, don't work, etc.
Bingo!
And yes I scratched my iPod Touch within two weeks of getting, or should I say my cat did when he knocked it off the table. (Hardwood floor, and probably hit a grain of sand or dust that did the scratching).
So yes, some of us do like the extra protection that is provided. My iPhone is inside a sleve and also had a screen protector. I do no find it limits the touch experience whatsoever, but does provide peace of mind.
I put the emphasis in there to prove a point. Besides, what's the harm? If Apple chooses not to give shelf space to a product, the worst thing that can happen is that Apple's retail sales figures decline. Far more likely, their sales figures will remain constant or continue to follow whatever trend they're already following. It's not like they're going to take out those products and just leave the shelf space empty, after all.
Because it's not simply about one product. As I said, it's the impression that the Apple Store is a one-stop shop for everything you need. Now, maybe this isn't technically true -- I certainly don't "need" a case for my laptop, nor "need" all the software they sell there -- but that is part of the allure of the Apple Store for the average consumer. It's part of the "complete" experience that has made the Apple Stores so successful. I think Apple is underestimating people's desire for this particular product, and they will end up undermining the overall impression of the Apple Store because of it.
That's oversimplified to the point of being misleading. The oleophobic coating is a polymer that's chemically bonded to the glass. Calling it a plastic coating makes it sound like it's just smeared on. It's the difference between electroplating something and wrapping it in aluminum foil.
Okay, it's a scratchable polymer coating bonded on top of the unscratchable glass surface.
I wasn't intending to condemn the process or material used. I was condemning the fact that they added an additional coating -- that scratches -- on top of a surface that somewhat famously did not scratch.
Incidentally, the idea that it scratches? Complete bunk.
Really? Both my phone, and the phones of many others would disagree.
I appreciate the detail with which you explained the process, btw -- I actually really love to understand the way a lot of these things work -- but real world usage situations indicate that it is not as cut and dried as perhaps Apple had hoped.
this despite widespread reports of scratches appearing quite easily on its handheld offerings for years.
Apple device screens are among the most durable and scratch-resistant you'll ever find. There's no actual need for any screen protection.
As for the ban, screen protection kind of defeats the purpose of oleophobic coatings, and does send the message that Apple's screens are in need of protection.
I've stopped using plastic screen protectors for my iPhone long ago, preferring a nice, thin, plastic/transparent backing. Works great.
Further, you can get your screen protectors elsewhere, just not in Apple Stores. No big deal.
I totally agree. I've been using my 3GS since the introduction without any films on the front panel and I do not have ANY scratch what so ever. Just wipe it couple of times with a nice cloth and it's good as new.
Not the best move ever by Apple. People go into the Apple stores to buy things like this, and end up coming out with more expensive purchases. I went in to get a new iPhone screen cover (with the anti-glare) and ended up buying a Blue-Tooth keyboard on a whim for my mini.
Why can't they just explain the move?
Probably because outside of sites such as this nobody really cares that much. Customers will ask after screen protectors, be told that Apple doesn't stock them, customers will say "Huh" and swing by Best Buy or order something online.
I doubt anyone is going to pitch a fit or demand an explanation.
So a screen protector is the only way to go (for me) and it does not get in the way of the "experience".