My iPod touch doesn't have a scratch on it, and I use it extensively.
Seems to me the same people complaining about the screens are the same people who complained about the Mighty Mouse. If you can't take care of your stuff, then it's on you.
Apple chooses not to sell the screens. Not that big of a deal, buy them somewhere else. The stores are Apple's stores, the company can choose what to sell or not. Just like Wal-Mart choosing not to sell CDs with explicit lyrics back in the day. Perfectly within the store's right. Just like it's perfectly within your right to choose at what stores to make purchases.
Let us start with two fundamental assumptions. First assumption: Anything that can scratch glass much necessarily be harder than glass. Fair enough?
Second assumption: Mere contact between glass and something harder than glass is insufficient to create a scratch. There must be some minimal amount of pressure applied, along with a force parallel to the surface of the glass. In other words, you have to push the things together and slide. Common sense, yeah?
Now. Imagine that you have a piece of the same optical glass used in iPhone screens, and also something hard enough to scratch it. Since optical glass has a Mohs hardness of six-and-a-half-ish, we're looking for something with a hardness of seven or more. Just to be on the safe side, let's go with tungsten carbide. That's ridiculously hard, with a Mohs rating of 9.
Now apply the tungsten carbide drill bit to the glass. Apply sufficient parallel and perpendicular forces to make a scratch. Write down the values of the parallel and perpendicular force components in your copybook.
Now apply one of these plasticky sheety things to the glass. Apply the drill bit again, using the same force we used before.
What happens? By gosh and by gum, the drill bit went right through the plastic like it wasn't even there. Seems like the plastic did absolutely no good whatsoever. Because, see, an object hard enough to scratch glass, applied with sufficient force to scratch glass, isn't going to be all that impressed by a piece of sellotape.
On the other hand, if we bring the drill bit and the plastic-wrapped glass together with sufficiently small force that it doesn't puncture the plastic, then we're not using nearly enough force to scratch the glass. So the "protection" the plastic provided was, in fact, useless.
That's the logic in a nutshell. Any contact with a sufficiently hard object, applied with enough force to be able to scratch the glass, will destroy the plastic. And any contact that's not sufficiently forceful to destroy the plastic cannot (by virtue of the plastic being softer) scratch the glass. In between, we have a whole set of possible contact scenarios where the plastic is damaged or destroyed but the glass remains unharmed, because glass is harder than plastic.
How's that?
Sorry, but that's untrue. If that were correct, then charcoal briquettes would be just as hard as diamonds, since they're both allotropes of pure carbon.
I think this is the part where I'm supposed to say "duh," but instead I'll just elaborate, 'cause I'm that kind of guy. See, chemical composition does not determine material hardness. That comes down to molecular structure. Diamond is harder than charcoal because it's got a different molecular structure. While you can find particles that can scratch glass ? quartz sand, for example ? that's not the same as saying that everything everywhere can scratch glass.
See, that's what we in the business call ? and I'm sorry to jargon this up ? "wrong." When you rub a softer thing against a harder thing, it's the softer thing that deforms.
You've completely lost me, I'm afraid. Are you talking about throwing a baseball through a window? You know that scratching glass and cracking or shattering it are two entirely different physical processes, yeah?
Perhaps you're right.
Give it a try. Take your house key and a glass from the cupboard. See if you can scratch the glass with your house key. Consider it a refresher course in science, right in your own home.
For those of you who don't want to follow along at home, I'll give the answer away. The kind of glass used to make things like window panes and drinking glasses has a hardness of around five and a half. Brass, which is the metal most keys are made of, has a hardness of around three and a half. You cannot scratch glass with brass. You can scratch that kind of glass with a high-carbon steel knife, which has a hardness that approaches six, but it's very difficult. You're more likely to break the glass or cut yourself if you're not very careful, because of the amount of force required.
Optical glass is harder than household glass. It's very, as the phrase goes, scratch-resistant.
on the moh's scale 7 is very hard citrine hard tourmaline hard
tanzanite is 5 1/2 to 6
quite brittle and cracks easy
there fore glass can be no more that 5 on the mohs scale maybe 4 1/2 ish
if apple uses resins and composites then that does not increase the hardness at all
unless they use ww11 nazi invented glues which are at about 7 on the mohs scales when dry
still almost any sharp point can scratch a pod screen
these at home test's only ruin your house
my new ipod 160 g CLASSIC has a 2 mm scratch from being in me pocket with keys at the same time
sometime i feel this forum is really on a weird parallel universe
I'm just wondering where everyone buys these one pocket pants. I have at least two front pockets in every pair of my pants. Even more for cargo shorts. Keys and coins (though I never carry coins) go in one pocket, the iPhone in the other. Also, I live at the beach and somehow I've managed to keep all this sand and dirt out of my pockets that everyone else seems to have.
HOWEVER, my original iPhone, after two years had zero scratches on the glass, but my 3GS somehow got a huge scratch after only a couple of months. I honestly have no idea how it happened. I'd think I'd remember how something like that happened, but I can't.
And folks need to chill on the screen protectors going away from Apple stores. You still can buy your screen protectors in hundreds of other places, and probably cheaper too.
Total resistant is out of the question. But whether or not to put a covering over it is an individual thing. For me, no, not now.
I got my iPhone nearly 2 years ago and within a week I got a long scratch on the glass. I was really upset. However, I had made no effort to protect it and after I cooled, I justs left it to my own ignorance.
I say that because like everything I have, I just use it. Unlike my sister-in-law who sold her 2-year old $60K Lexus for $5k more than she paid for it. (You can eat off her garage floors-she tiled it herself).
Anyway, I seeked out a case and screen cover. But after a month or two the plastic looked like crap. More important, I began to feel that the touch screen wasn't responding as I thought it should especially when copy/paste became available. Eventually, I took it into the Apple Store and had a Genius check it out. Without saying a word, he took my iPhone out of the case and using very gentle vs my clenching pressure, it worked perfectly. Every concern I had just went away. "It's the case." I tossed it and never looked back.
What is most interesting that since that time, I really haven't changed my habits much. I continue to throw it in my pocket with my car keys, coins and pens. And yet the only real mark on my iPhone is the one that I got the first week I had it. Go figure.
Now my sister-in-law bought a case for her iPhone before she left the store. For the first year, you could have sworn it just came out of the box. Well, she went to Hawaii, (she loves the beach) and within a week, her phone looked like it went through a grinder. Turns out some fine grains of sand had gotten under the protective screen… and voila.
But to no avail. I gave her a number to call and she went and had the screen replaced for about $70 at the time. I see that you can get it done now for a lot less, especially if you do it yourself (http://shop.ebay.com/?_from=R40&_trk...All-Categories)
And at these prices, it's cheaper than the protective sheets in the stores and definitely better looking.
P.S. This reminds me of the time we had our carpets replaced went hardwood and the flooring company told us that the worst thing for carpets was stocking feet. Better to keep your shoes on or go barefoot because the dirt and grime won't adhere to the soles as much as it will to the wool/nylon.
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.
Other than a few nutbars with videos on YouTube of dubious authenticity, there are no "widespread reports" of problems with the iPhone screen scratching. The only serious attempts at testing the durability of the screen that I've seen show people scratching really hard across the surface with sets of keys without leaving a scratch. In fact, it's very very difficult to scratch an iPhone screen. It's tougher than any of the silly plastic coverings for sale that supposedly "protect it."
I wouldn't mind betting that Apple removed them because they don't want to get involved in a fraud lawsuit for selling products that actually don't do anything close to what they are advertised as doing. It's borderline fraud to be selling a plastic screen "protector" for a hardened, tempered glass screen.
You may want a full-fledged case for your iPhone and the chrome ring and the plastic back will certainly get scuffed, but the *last* thing you need protection for is the tough glass screen.
How is it fraud? I have seen two particular uses for a plastic screen on an iphone, as well as my Macbook Pro.
1. Macbook Pro / iPhone - screens also provide privacy so that others nearby aren't rubber-necking your reading materials.
2. The screen also gives the screen the equivalency of safety glass when a screen is severely broken. I have seen a screen on two iPhones that did not shatter due to the screen cover.
Unless you are incredibly careless it's virtually impossible to scratch an iPhone screen, and worse, those so called screen protectors deaden the touch screen enormously. They are a total waste of time, energy, and money.
Unless you are incredibly careless it's virtually impossible to scratch an iPhone screen, and worse, those so called screen protectors deaden the touch screen enormously. They are a total waste of time, energy, and money.
This shows total ignorance as you have obviously never used a Power Support non-glare film made from high grade plastic that they utilize. The touch sensitivity is not impaired in the least. There was a line of five or more in Apple Meat Market storewaiting to get theirs applied as NY is bombarded with external lighting and non glare is very important to many of us here and they are extremely popular.
... every time I see a scratched up iPod Touch or iPhone I quietly chuckle to myself.
I'm sure to get plenty of laughs when I see all the iPads being scratched up.
The reason why these screens are easily scratched even rubbing on plain jeans, is because the glass is CHEAP.
Glass is only has hard as the minerals put into it. My 8 year old Tag watch used everyday and it has no scratches, still shines like the day I got it.
You are a fool and you don't know what you're talking about. You haven't even read the thread.
There is a post a little bit back from this by someone who does know what they are talking about, including exactly what glass is used, how hard it is, and what that means in regards the anecdotal evidence of "guessers" like yourself.
Suffice to say, you are completely wrong about everything you are stating here.
How is it fraud? I have seen two particular uses for a plastic screen on an iphone, as well as my Macbook Pro.
1. Macbook Pro / iPhone - screens also provide privacy so that others nearby aren't rubber-necking your reading materials.
2. The screen also gives the screen the equivalency of safety glass when a screen is severely broken. I have seen a screen on two iPhones that did not shatter due to the screen cover.
I
I said "borderline fraud" (which typically means it *should* be fraud, but that no one will ever prosecute it).
In any case, you are just mentioning alternate, related uses of the film here. What I am saying is if the package they sell it in has language to the effect that it will "protect" the hardened glass screen of the iPhone, then that's wrong in that it's intentionally misleading. They are selling an unnecessary product that isn't going to actually do what it's advertised to do.
The language is probably vague enough that no one will want to prosecute, but the lack of a prosecution in my mind doesn't change the inherent deception. You will likely see many manufacturers change their product language back to the completely safe "anti-glare" film variety just to be sure they are *never* prosecuted.
Speaking with the experience of someone who has had a lot of pocket devices over the years, I can tell you that the people selling "films" for these things (even those that need them) are shysters and rip-off artists for the most part. It's a "quick buck" scheme of the highest order.
The "film" itself is not actually manufactured for this purpose and can be bought in bulk if you have the right licences. It costs literally pennies a linear metre, but one square metre is sold to the customer at hundreds and hundreds of times that price. The "manufacturing cost" is also pennies. In some cases it's a person with a paper cuter or a pair of scissors. It's a giant rip-off and if it were being "manufactured" in any country besides the USA or China, consumer protection agencies might get involved at least.
Speaking with the experience of someone who has had a lot of pocket devices over the years, I can tell you that the people selling "films" for these things (even those that need them) are shysters and rip-off artists for the most part. It's a "quick buck" scheme of the highest order.
A "shyster or rip-off artists" is the manufacturer who for years had no qualms about selling holdsters and jogging apparatus for iPods knowing full well that mechanical hard drives would break with the slightest bump. Funny how something that actually protects the life is now banned.
Wasn't there a patent recently, regarding touch-sensitive panels capable of providing tactile feedback? Film appliques would certainly interfere with that. If Apple has plans on transitioning to that next level of interface, then it might make sense that they want to wean users away from the practice.
My friend who is an Apple Genius insisted that I get a screen protector for my iPhone. He said that cracked screens are one of the most common problems they see. Replacing a cracked screen costs $199 at Apple. I'd rather pay $15 and be a little safer.
I think the other big problem is that it requires a good degree of coordination and a clean room to put those films on squarely and without any dust trapped under them.
There is a difference between a crack and a scratch. While a screen protector may protect from scratches (we have them on our family's 3GSs and Touches but who knows maybe they are not needed at all...), it will not protect from a crack (which is caused by significant physical force).
You are a fool and you don't know what you're talking about. You haven't even read the thread.
There is a post a little bit back from this by someone who does know what they are talking about, including exactly what glass is used, how hard it is, and what that means in regards the anecdotal evidence of "guessers" like yourself.
Suffice to say, you are completely wrong about everything you are stating here.
lmao inflammatory comments and personal attacks. some people really do get wound up and personal over brands, don't they?
Sapphire glass used in expensive watchfaces is harder than normal glass.
To use that glass on an iPhone would be:-
a) extremely expensive, think tens of thousands of dollars
b) impossible as you have to "grow" a crystal of sapphire large enough.
Twenty month old iPhone 3G here, spends most of the day in my pocket with coins and keys, not a single scratch on it.
The first generation iPhones had much harder/scratch resistant "glass" than the current production models. I have no idea what the difference in the actual materials may have been. I just sat through a presentation yesterday by a well known Apple author and he said that his first generation iPhone's face did just fine in his pocket, but that the current one scratched after rather little use. He strongly recommended the use of the screen protector.
I would like to hear Apple's reason/excuse for this move. They are making money selling these things and so, even if their official position is that they are not necessary, there is no reason not to sell them. I have never heard of them causing harm to the screen.
Comments
Seems to me the same people complaining about the screens are the same people who complained about the Mighty Mouse. If you can't take care of your stuff, then it's on you.
Apple chooses not to sell the screens. Not that big of a deal, buy them somewhere else. The stores are Apple's stores, the company can choose what to sell or not. Just like Wal-Mart choosing not to sell CDs with explicit lyrics back in the day. Perfectly within the store's right. Just like it's perfectly within your right to choose at what stores to make purchases.
Okie doke, I'll give it a shot.
Let us start with two fundamental assumptions. First assumption: Anything that can scratch glass much necessarily be harder than glass. Fair enough?
Second assumption: Mere contact between glass and something harder than glass is insufficient to create a scratch. There must be some minimal amount of pressure applied, along with a force parallel to the surface of the glass. In other words, you have to push the things together and slide. Common sense, yeah?
Now. Imagine that you have a piece of the same optical glass used in iPhone screens, and also something hard enough to scratch it. Since optical glass has a Mohs hardness of six-and-a-half-ish, we're looking for something with a hardness of seven or more. Just to be on the safe side, let's go with tungsten carbide. That's ridiculously hard, with a Mohs rating of 9.
Now apply the tungsten carbide drill bit to the glass. Apply sufficient parallel and perpendicular forces to make a scratch. Write down the values of the parallel and perpendicular force components in your copybook.
Now apply one of these plasticky sheety things to the glass. Apply the drill bit again, using the same force we used before.
What happens? By gosh and by gum, the drill bit went right through the plastic like it wasn't even there. Seems like the plastic did absolutely no good whatsoever. Because, see, an object hard enough to scratch glass, applied with sufficient force to scratch glass, isn't going to be all that impressed by a piece of sellotape.
On the other hand, if we bring the drill bit and the plastic-wrapped glass together with sufficiently small force that it doesn't puncture the plastic, then we're not using nearly enough force to scratch the glass. So the "protection" the plastic provided was, in fact, useless.
That's the logic in a nutshell. Any contact with a sufficiently hard object, applied with enough force to be able to scratch the glass, will destroy the plastic. And any contact that's not sufficiently forceful to destroy the plastic cannot (by virtue of the plastic being softer) scratch the glass. In between, we have a whole set of possible contact scenarios where the plastic is damaged or destroyed but the glass remains unharmed, because glass is harder than plastic.
How's that?
Sorry, but that's untrue. If that were correct, then charcoal briquettes would be just as hard as diamonds, since they're both allotropes of pure carbon.
I think this is the part where I'm supposed to say "duh," but instead I'll just elaborate, 'cause I'm that kind of guy. See, chemical composition does not determine material hardness. That comes down to molecular structure. Diamond is harder than charcoal because it's got a different molecular structure. While you can find particles that can scratch glass ? quartz sand, for example ? that's not the same as saying that everything everywhere can scratch glass.
See, that's what we in the business call ? and I'm sorry to jargon this up ? "wrong." When you rub a softer thing against a harder thing, it's the softer thing that deforms.
You've completely lost me, I'm afraid. Are you talking about throwing a baseball through a window? You know that scratching glass and cracking or shattering it are two entirely different physical processes, yeah?
Perhaps you're right.
Give it a try. Take your house key and a glass from the cupboard. See if you can scratch the glass with your house key. Consider it a refresher course in science, right in your own home.
For those of you who don't want to follow along at home, I'll give the answer away. The kind of glass used to make things like window panes and drinking glasses has a hardness of around five and a half. Brass, which is the metal most keys are made of, has a hardness of around three and a half. You cannot scratch glass with brass. You can scratch that kind of glass with a high-carbon steel knife, which has a hardness that approaches six, but it's very difficult. You're more likely to break the glass or cut yourself if you're not very careful, because of the amount of force required.
Optical glass is harder than household glass. It's very, as the phrase goes, scratch-resistant.
on the moh's scale 7 is very hard citrine hard tourmaline hard
tanzanite is 5 1/2 to 6
quite brittle and cracks easy
there fore glass can be no more that 5 on the mohs scale maybe 4 1/2 ish
if apple uses resins and composites then that does not increase the hardness at all
unless they use ww11 nazi invented glues which are at about 7 on the mohs scales when dry
still almost any sharp point can scratch a pod screen
these at home test's only ruin your house
my new ipod 160 g CLASSIC has a 2 mm scratch from being in me pocket with keys at the same time
sometime i feel this forum is really on a weird parallel universe
frak me
MOH 8
on the moh's scale 7 is very hard citrine hard tourmaline hard
tanzanite is 5 1/2 to 6
quite brittle and cracks easy
there fore glass can be no more that 5 on the mohs scale maybe 4 1/2 ish
if apple uses resins and composites then that does not increase the hardness at all
unless they use ww11 nazi invented glues which are at about 7 on the mohs scales when dry
still almost any sharp point can scratch a pod screen
these at home test's only ruin your house
my new ipod 160 g CLASSIC has a 2 mm scratch from being in me pocket with keys at the same time
sometime i feel this forum is really on a weird parallel universe
frak me
HOWEVER, my original iPhone, after two years had zero scratches on the glass, but my 3GS somehow got a huge scratch after only a couple of months. I honestly have no idea how it happened. I'd think I'd remember how something like that happened, but I can't.
And folks need to chill on the screen protectors going away from Apple stores. You still can buy your screen protectors in hundreds of other places, and probably cheaper too.
Total resistant is out of the question. But whether or not to put a covering over it is an individual thing. For me, no, not now.
I got my iPhone nearly 2 years ago and within a week I got a long scratch on the glass. I was really upset. However, I had made no effort to protect it and after I cooled, I justs left it to my own ignorance.
I say that because like everything I have, I just use it. Unlike my sister-in-law who sold her 2-year old $60K Lexus for $5k more than she paid for it. (You can eat off her garage floors-she tiled it herself).
Anyway, I seeked out a case and screen cover. But after a month or two the plastic looked like crap. More important, I began to feel that the touch screen wasn't responding as I thought it should especially when copy/paste became available. Eventually, I took it into the Apple Store and had a Genius check it out. Without saying a word, he took my iPhone out of the case and using very gentle vs my clenching pressure, it worked perfectly. Every concern I had just went away. "It's the case." I tossed it and never looked back.
What is most interesting that since that time, I really haven't changed my habits much. I continue to throw it in my pocket with my car keys, coins and pens. And yet the only real mark on my iPhone is the one that I got the first week I had it. Go figure.
Now my sister-in-law bought a case for her iPhone before she left the store. For the first year, you could have sworn it just came out of the box. Well, she went to Hawaii, (she loves the beach) and within a week, her phone looked like it went through a grinder. Turns out some fine grains of sand had gotten under the protective screen… and voila.
But to no avail. I gave her a number to call and she went and had the screen replaced for about $70 at the time. I see that you can get it done now for a lot less, especially if you do it yourself (http://shop.ebay.com/?_from=R40&_trk...All-Categories)
And at these prices, it's cheaper than the protective sheets in the stores and definitely better looking.
P.S. This reminds me of the time we had our carpets replaced went hardwood and the flooring company told us that the worst thing for carpets was stocking feet. Better to keep your shoes on or go barefoot because the dirt and grime won't adhere to the soles as much as it will to the wool/nylon.
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.
Other than a few nutbars with videos on YouTube of dubious authenticity, there are no "widespread reports" of problems with the iPhone screen scratching. The only serious attempts at testing the durability of the screen that I've seen show people scratching really hard across the surface with sets of keys without leaving a scratch. In fact, it's very very difficult to scratch an iPhone screen. It's tougher than any of the silly plastic coverings for sale that supposedly "protect it."
I wouldn't mind betting that Apple removed them because they don't want to get involved in a fraud lawsuit for selling products that actually don't do anything close to what they are advertised as doing. It's borderline fraud to be selling a plastic screen "protector" for a hardened, tempered glass screen.
You may want a full-fledged case for your iPhone and the chrome ring and the plastic back will certainly get scuffed, but the *last* thing you need protection for is the tough glass screen.
How is it fraud? I have seen two particular uses for a plastic screen on an iphone, as well as my Macbook Pro.
1. Macbook Pro / iPhone - screens also provide privacy so that others nearby aren't rubber-necking your reading materials.
2. The screen also gives the screen the equivalency of safety glass when a screen is severely broken. I have seen a screen on two iPhones that did not shatter due to the screen cover.
I
Time to go back to school. It should be "effect", not "affect."
OR, he could have just mistyped the word.
Unless you are incredibly careless it's virtually impossible to scratch an iPhone screen, and worse, those so called screen protectors deaden the touch screen enormously. They are a total waste of time, energy, and money.
This shows total ignorance as you have obviously never used a Power Support non-glare film made from high grade plastic that they utilize. The touch sensitivity is not impaired in the least. There was a line of five or more in Apple Meat Market storewaiting to get theirs applied as NY is bombarded with external lighting and non glare is very important to many of us here and they are extremely popular.
... every time I see a scratched up iPod Touch or iPhone I quietly chuckle to myself.
I'm sure to get plenty of laughs when I see all the iPads being scratched up.
The reason why these screens are easily scratched even rubbing on plain jeans, is because the glass is CHEAP.
Glass is only has hard as the minerals put into it. My 8 year old Tag watch used everyday and it has no scratches, still shines like the day I got it.
You are a fool and you don't know what you're talking about. You haven't even read the thread.
There is a post a little bit back from this by someone who does know what they are talking about, including exactly what glass is used, how hard it is, and what that means in regards the anecdotal evidence of "guessers" like yourself.
Suffice to say, you are completely wrong about everything you are stating here.
How is it fraud? I have seen two particular uses for a plastic screen on an iphone, as well as my Macbook Pro.
1. Macbook Pro / iPhone - screens also provide privacy so that others nearby aren't rubber-necking your reading materials.
2. The screen also gives the screen the equivalency of safety glass when a screen is severely broken. I have seen a screen on two iPhones that did not shatter due to the screen cover.
I
I said "borderline fraud" (which typically means it *should* be fraud, but that no one will ever prosecute it).
In any case, you are just mentioning alternate, related uses of the film here. What I am saying is if the package they sell it in has language to the effect that it will "protect" the hardened glass screen of the iPhone, then that's wrong in that it's intentionally misleading. They are selling an unnecessary product that isn't going to actually do what it's advertised to do.
The language is probably vague enough that no one will want to prosecute, but the lack of a prosecution in my mind doesn't change the inherent deception. You will likely see many manufacturers change their product language back to the completely safe "anti-glare" film variety just to be sure they are *never* prosecuted.
Speaking with the experience of someone who has had a lot of pocket devices over the years, I can tell you that the people selling "films" for these things (even those that need them) are shysters and rip-off artists for the most part. It's a "quick buck" scheme of the highest order.
The "film" itself is not actually manufactured for this purpose and can be bought in bulk if you have the right licences. It costs literally pennies a linear metre, but one square metre is sold to the customer at hundreds and hundreds of times that price. The "manufacturing cost" is also pennies. In some cases it's a person with a paper cuter or a pair of scissors. It's a giant rip-off and if it were being "manufactured" in any country besides the USA or China, consumer protection agencies might get involved at least.
Speaking with the experience of someone who has had a lot of pocket devices over the years, I can tell you that the people selling "films" for these things (even those that need them) are shysters and rip-off artists for the most part. It's a "quick buck" scheme of the highest order.
A "shyster or rip-off artists" is the manufacturer who for years had no qualms about selling holdsters and jogging apparatus for iPods knowing full well that mechanical hard drives would break with the slightest bump. Funny how something that actually protects the life is now banned.
Funny how something that actually protects the life is now banned.
..and someone that makes life miserable is not.
My friend who is an Apple Genius insisted that I get a screen protector for my iPhone. He said that cracked screens are one of the most common problems they see. Replacing a cracked screen costs $199 at Apple. I'd rather pay $15 and be a little safer.
I think the other big problem is that it requires a good degree of coordination and a clean room to put those films on squarely and without any dust trapped under them.
There is a difference between a crack and a scratch. While a screen protector may protect from scratches (we have them on our family's 3GSs and Touches but who knows maybe they are not needed at all...), it will not protect from a crack (which is caused by significant physical force).
You are a fool and you don't know what you're talking about. You haven't even read the thread.
There is a post a little bit back from this by someone who does know what they are talking about, including exactly what glass is used, how hard it is, and what that means in regards the anecdotal evidence of "guessers" like yourself.
Suffice to say, you are completely wrong about everything you are stating here.
lmao inflammatory comments and personal attacks. some people really do get wound up and personal over brands, don't they?
Would you feel the same way about Target or Walmarts if they stopped selling third party product?
I use a screen protector and will continue to and if Apple does not want my money I will give it to another company. It's all good!!!
Sapphire glass used in expensive watchfaces is harder than normal glass.
To use that glass on an iPhone would be:-
a) extremely expensive, think tens of thousands of dollars
b) impossible as you have to "grow" a crystal of sapphire large enough.
Twenty month old iPhone 3G here, spends most of the day in my pocket with coins and keys, not a single scratch on it.
The first generation iPhones had much harder/scratch resistant "glass" than the current production models. I have no idea what the difference in the actual materials may have been. I just sat through a presentation yesterday by a well known Apple author and he said that his first generation iPhone's face did just fine in his pocket, but that the current one scratched after rather little use. He strongly recommended the use of the screen protector.
I would like to hear Apple's reason/excuse for this move. They are making money selling these things and so, even if their official position is that they are not necessary, there is no reason not to sell them. I have never heard of them causing harm to the screen.
Doesn't Apple have better things to do?