This is possible, but I'm not convinced. We?re told that CF is really light and strong, but it needs a minimum thickness in order to exceed the strength to weight ratio of aluminum. On top of that, CF is more prone to defeats in production can can't be formed with the exactness of aluminium where Apple can add or take away a little thickness to idealize it for the iPad 2's needs.
Then there is recycliablity. Sure, the carbon is recyclyable, but the resin that is used in it often isn't it. Finally, it acts like a Faraday cage within the layers of CF blocking RF means it won?t be a good replacement to boost wireless connectivity.
I?m not saying it can't or won't be beneficial for Apple, just that the info so far suggests that it's not likely to happen with the size of CF they are suggesting. I?d first expect Apple to experiment with forming smaller, less obvious pieces in shipping products to test it out. For instance, in a remote control or an iPod, or really just anything that doesn?t take up a square foot of space and is the 2nd most popular Apple product (and perhaps 1st in mindshare) currently shipping.
Add in poor thermal conductivity compared to aluminum.
Considering the molding process for creating carbon fiber parts, I think ramping up production to the quantities Apple would need would add yet another headache to Apple's already strained supply chain. And in today's world of rumors and leaked information, if the iPad is to be released next week, we surely would have heard by now if some massive new CF production line was starting up someplace. No way would it have been kept a secret, even by Apple.
I could see Apple using CF (in iPad 3) as an internal frame if it allowed them to use a thinner aluminum (or other material) skin and still maintain overall stiffness. But even that could be tricky to bond the metal to the CF reliably.
I was "hoping" they would be true this time around as I was ready to buy one if they were! I will now wait until the next release which I am pretty sure will be a true redesign. I was thinking like so many others that this release of the MBP would have followed the MBA.
Expensive, prone to cracking, poor thermal conductors, poooor recycling. Composites just are not economically viable imo. How much weight would you actually save for those other tradeoffs?
Compared to milling a billet of aluminum, it isn't that expensive. Recycling is actually viable, in fact it could easily be made of recycled carbon fiber given the small size. The cracking issue is a function of how it is designed, and the thermal conductivity can be addressed with a composite housing with an integrated heat sink.
But, I do agree that the weight savings is not really enough to justify the added complexity. The unibody process is simple, repeatable, and does not require the same expertise and equipment as carbon composites. The idea of seeing 8-10,000 iPad bodies coming out of an autoclave in one batch is a hard one to get my mind around.
I'm starting to think Apple is successfully closing all its leaks. This week everybody got the MBP details wrong and none of the rumour sites knew about Lion. Those were not likely closely guarded secrets (compared to the iPad 2). The fact that Apple felt comfortable revealing so many details about Lion - which is probably the most dramatic update to OS X since it was released - a week before its "Come see what 2011 is the year of" event makes me think we're going to get more than just a minor iPad spec update and nobody has a clue what's going on. (Nobody has any details of iOS 5 either.) That said, after seeing the reviews for the Motorola Xoom, I think they'd be fine just releasing a minor spec update. They probably have a whole extra year before the competition gets itself together.
Is it getting to a stage where AI is going to post an article about everything and anything out there, so if 'rumor x' comes true AI can say they reported it.
I was "hoping" they would be true this time around as I was ready to buy one if they were! I will now wait until the next release which I am pretty sure will be a true redesign. I was thinking like so many others that this release of the MBP would have followed the MBA.
I don't get this sort of comment, I'm not saying you don;t mean it, but is the choice of material for the rear casing really the deciding factor in purchasing one? Especially on a device where teh whole point is that the device itself it meant to be ignored and unobtrustive. I know, it may be a couple hundred grams lighter, but still...
Mind you, I am anti-carbon fibre, I think it looks cheap and tacky, although that is coming from the car parts aftermarket where carbon fibre dashboards/handbrake covers/etc do my head in also.
It's the same with the dealbreakers, how often do you see a commenter come out with a "Dealbreaker!" comment, because of some minor point like only having 2 USb ports and such. We are a fussy lot, me included, I suppose.
This site is becoming more and more ridiculous. A footnote in a blog used by it's author to highlight the idiocy or promoting rumor is then used as the basis for an article on this site to promote a rumor!? WTF!
I am going to spend less time on this site. It has become less informative and more noise.
No need to be so dramatic about it. Here's how you deal with it:
Scan the headlines and make a judgement. Its as simple as that. As has been pointed out, at peak rumour time rumours are frequent and often extremely flimsy. The title of this article says it all. If you have been hanging around a while you can tell its a big nothing.
Don't read anything you are not interested in or deem unworthy.
Expensive, prone to cracking, poor thermal conductors, poooor recycling. Composites just are not economically viable imo. How much weight would you actually save for those other tradeoffs?
You said it. Aint gonna happen. Liquidmetal body is what I am predicting.
One things seems to still be overlooked the day after the MBP announcements: Will the next iPad get Thunderbolt? Is that what that mDP looking port is for on those leaked case designs?
The placement of that potential mDP port seems odd to me. I want to know if it?s possible for Thunderbolt to be added to the system directly with the pinout using the deprecated FireWire ports in the 30-pin dock connector.
There are no specs of Thunderbolt?s pinouts, but we do have details for both the 30-pin connector and DisplayPort.
Could the 6 pins for USB3.0 built into DP, be used for Thunderbolt data transfer for a direct 6-pin exchange for the 30-pin dock connector? I sure hope so! Note that Thunderbolt pushes less power than FW does, and that DP and mDP ports have the same number of pins.
Note that if the iPad 2 doesn?t have this that the other iDevices surely won?t get this as it?s a very large chip for a mobile device. Apple might have a less powerful, smaller version of the Thunderbolt chip for iDevices that, say, push half the data, but so far that doesn?t seem likely.
I'm not sold on that one, what are the benefits over Aluminium? A bit more scratch resistant? Not worth the cost, as it's not cheap stuff. I was under the impression that it was ideal for high wear/load components, special bolts/fixings etc, but as a large sheet of effectively casing material, it's overkill.
One things seems to still be overlooked the day after the MBP announcements: Will the next iPad get Thunderbolt? Is that what that mDP looking port is for on those leaked case designs?
The placement of that potential mDP port seems odd to me. I want to know if it’s possible for Thunderbolt to be added to the system directly with the pinout using the deprecated FireWire ports in the 30-pin dock connector.
There are no specs of Thunderbolt’s pinouts, but we do have details for both the 30-pin connector and DisplayPort.
Could the 6 pins for USB3.0 built into DP, be used for Thunderbolt data transfer for a direct 6-pin exchange for the 30-pin dock connector? I sure hope so! Note that Thunderbolt pushes less power than FW does, and that DP and mDP ports have the same number of pins.
Note that if the iPad 2 doesn’t have this that the other iDevices surely won’t get this as it’s a very large chip for a mobile device. Apple might have a less powerful, smaller version of the Thunderbolt chip for iDevices that, say, push half the data, but so far that doesn’t seem likely.
Think you are misunderstanding how Thunderbolt works, it's basically like exposing bits of your innards to the world via a connector, and the whole works relies on PCI Express as the hardware transport mechanism. That's all very much PC and X86 territory, there are no expansion buses at all from what I understand within the iPad, much less PCI Express ones. I can't see the existing iPad getting this at all. However, a newer iPad next time with a revised motherboard architecture might make is possible, but I doubt it will ever see the light of day as a host device, probably only as an endpoint device (it's not going to have 2 ports for passing through) for increased syncing speed? I've probably just contradicted myself there but never mind!
Nop. No carbon. This requires a completely different production process. And carbon production is difficult to scale up.
Its also prone to all kinds of problems, like cracking sounds when stressed and very easily scratching or 'shaving'. Look at the bicycle industry for details.
It is very probable that a future pad, pod, MacBook iMac has a unibody liquid metal shell.
It has three advantages compared to aluminum: it's cheap and light and can be injected in a casting mold.
Whether or not they use carbon fibre, your statement about liquid metal is wrong.
- not lighter
- not cheaper
In fact, it's metal just like any other so it's far heavier than carbon fibre. It's also prohibitively expensive for large scale (bigger than a tiny cog or gear) use. This is why it failed to catch on in consumer products requiring Apple to essentially rescue the company from bankruptcy by offering millions of dollars for an exclusive licence.
One things seems to still be overlooked the day after the MBP announcements: Will the next iPad get Thunderbolt? Is that what that mDP looking port is for on those leaked case designs?
The placement of that potential mDP port seems odd to me. I want to know if it?s possible for Thunderbolt to be added to the system directly with the pinout using the deprecated FireWire ports in the 30-pin dock connector.
There are no specs of Thunderbolt?s pinouts, but we do have details for both the 30-pin connector and DisplayPort.
Could the 6 pins for USB3.0 built into DP, be used for Thunderbolt data transfer for a direct 6-pin exchange for the 30-pin dock connector? I sure hope so! Note that Thunderbolt pushes less power than FW does, and that DP and mDP ports have the same number of pins.
Note that if the iPad 2 doesn?t have this that the other iDevices surely won?t get this as it?s a very large chip for a mobile device. Apple might have a less powerful, smaller version of the Thunderbolt chip for iDevices that, say, push half the data, but so far that doesn?t seem likely.
[QUOTE=I'm not sold on that one, what are the benefits over Aluminium? A bit more scratch resistant? Not worth the cost, as it's not cheap stuff. I was under the impression that it was ideal for high wear/load components, special bolts/fixings etc, but as a large sheet of effectively casing material, it's overkill.[/QUOTE]
i guess that boeing is going to recall (not released yet) the 787 dreamliner because the fuselage is too large. there is so much misinformation about the properties of cf that it's almost not worth discussing.
btw, most of the indy 500 and daytona racers use them on their brake linings. in fact if you have money and love your ferrari (etc) you can already order cf brake pads. and as far as conductivity, it's better than copper.
and the price will come down as new evolutionary manufacturing techniques are already being used.
i guess that boeing is going to recall (not released yet) the 787 dreamliner because the fuselage is too large. there is so much misinformation about the properties of cf that it's almost not worth discussing.
btw, most of the indy 500 and daytona racers use them on their brake linings. in fact if you have money and love your ferrari (etc) you can already order cf brake pads. and as far as conductivity, it's better than copper.
and the price will come down as new evolutionary manufacturing techniques are already being used.
I was referring to the comments about using Liquid Metal, although either way I did say it was my impression, and wasn't trying to report opinion as fact
Comments
This is possible, but I'm not convinced. We?re told that CF is really light and strong, but it needs a minimum thickness in order to exceed the strength to weight ratio of aluminum. On top of that, CF is more prone to defeats in production can can't be formed with the exactness of aluminium where Apple can add or take away a little thickness to idealize it for the iPad 2's needs.
Then there is recycliablity. Sure, the carbon is recyclyable, but the resin that is used in it often isn't it. Finally, it acts like a Faraday cage within the layers of CF blocking RF means it won?t be a good replacement to boost wireless connectivity.
I?m not saying it can't or won't be beneficial for Apple, just that the info so far suggests that it's not likely to happen with the size of CF they are suggesting. I?d first expect Apple to experiment with forming smaller, less obvious pieces in shipping products to test it out. For instance, in a remote control or an iPod, or really just anything that doesn?t take up a square foot of space and is the 2nd most popular Apple product (and perhaps 1st in mindshare) currently shipping.
Add in poor thermal conductivity compared to aluminum.
Considering the molding process for creating carbon fiber parts, I think ramping up production to the quantities Apple would need would add yet another headache to Apple's already strained supply chain. And in today's world of rumors and leaked information, if the iPad is to be released next week, we surely would have heard by now if some massive new CF production line was starting up someplace. No way would it have been kept a secret, even by Apple.
I could see Apple using CF (in iPad 3) as an internal frame if it allowed them to use a thinner aluminum (or other material) skin and still maintain overall stiffness. But even that could be tricky to bond the metal to the CF reliably.
I am going to spend less time on this site. It has become less informative and more noise.
FWIW, that means you won't be reading any Apple blogs then, because most have linked to the Gruber post.
If you get upset about drooling anticipation, then you're engaged in the wrong community. Its always been an Apple aficionado passtime. Deal with it.
Bunk
Expensive, prone to cracking, poor thermal conductors, poooor recycling. Composites just are not economically viable imo. How much weight would you actually save for those other tradeoffs?
Compared to milling a billet of aluminum, it isn't that expensive. Recycling is actually viable, in fact it could easily be made of recycled carbon fiber given the small size. The cracking issue is a function of how it is designed, and the thermal conductivity can be addressed with a composite housing with an integrated heat sink.
But, I do agree that the weight savings is not really enough to justify the added complexity. The unibody process is simple, repeatable, and does not require the same expertise and equipment as carbon composites. The idea of seeing 8-10,000 iPad bodies coming out of an autoclave in one batch is a hard one to get my mind around.
I was "hoping" they would be true this time around as I was ready to buy one if they were! I will now wait until the next release which I am pretty sure will be a true redesign. I was thinking like so many others that this release of the MBP would have followed the MBA.
I don't get this sort of comment, I'm not saying you don;t mean it, but is the choice of material for the rear casing really the deciding factor in purchasing one? Especially on a device where teh whole point is that the device itself it meant to be ignored and unobtrustive. I know, it may be a couple hundred grams lighter, but still...
Mind you, I am anti-carbon fibre, I think it looks cheap and tacky, although that is coming from the car parts aftermarket where carbon fibre dashboards/handbrake covers/etc do my head in also.
It's the same with the dealbreakers, how often do you see a commenter come out with a "Dealbreaker!" comment, because of some minor point like only having 2 USb ports and such. We are a fussy lot, me included, I suppose.
Keep the news flowing, some of us still appreciate what you do AI.
Seconded.
(What a bunch of curmudgeonly whiners. You'd think they had a paid subscription to AI).
This site is becoming more and more ridiculous. A footnote in a blog used by it's author to highlight the idiocy or promoting rumor is then used as the basis for an article on this site to promote a rumor!? WTF!
I am going to spend less time on this site. It has become less informative and more noise.
No need to be so dramatic about it. Here's how you deal with it:
Scan the headlines and make a judgement. Its as simple as that. As has been pointed out, at peak rumour time rumours are frequent and often extremely flimsy. The title of this article says it all. If you have been hanging around a while you can tell its a big nothing.
Don't read anything you are not interested in or deem unworthy.
Bunk
Expensive, prone to cracking, poor thermal conductors, poooor recycling. Composites just are not economically viable imo. How much weight would you actually save for those other tradeoffs?
You said it. Aint gonna happen. Liquidmetal body is what I am predicting.
You said it. Aint gonna happen. Liquidmetal body is what I am predicting.
Agreed.
The placement of that potential mDP port seems odd to me. I want to know if it?s possible for Thunderbolt to be added to the system directly with the pinout using the deprecated FireWire ports in the 30-pin dock connector.
There are no specs of Thunderbolt?s pinouts, but we do have details for both the 30-pin connector and DisplayPort.Could the 6 pins for USB3.0 built into DP, be used for Thunderbolt data transfer for a direct 6-pin exchange for the 30-pin dock connector? I sure hope so! Note that Thunderbolt pushes less power than FW does, and that DP and mDP ports have the same number of pins.
Note that if the iPad 2 doesn?t have this that the other iDevices surely won?t get this as it?s a very large chip for a mobile device. Apple might have a less powerful, smaller version of the Thunderbolt chip for iDevices that, say, push half the data, but so far that doesn?t seem likely.
Agreed.
I'm not sold on that one, what are the benefits over Aluminium? A bit more scratch resistant? Not worth the cost, as it's not cheap stuff. I was under the impression that it was ideal for high wear/load components, special bolts/fixings etc, but as a large sheet of effectively casing material, it's overkill.
One things seems to still be overlooked the day after the MBP announcements: Will the next iPad get Thunderbolt? Is that what that mDP looking port is for on those leaked case designs?
The placement of that potential mDP port seems odd to me. I want to know if it’s possible for Thunderbolt to be added to the system directly with the pinout using the deprecated FireWire ports in the 30-pin dock connector.
There are no specs of Thunderbolt’s pinouts, but we do have details for both the 30-pin connector and DisplayPort.Could the 6 pins for USB3.0 built into DP, be used for Thunderbolt data transfer for a direct 6-pin exchange for the 30-pin dock connector? I sure hope so! Note that Thunderbolt pushes less power than FW does, and that DP and mDP ports have the same number of pins.
Note that if the iPad 2 doesn’t have this that the other iDevices surely won’t get this as it’s a very large chip for a mobile device. Apple might have a less powerful, smaller version of the Thunderbolt chip for iDevices that, say, push half the data, but so far that doesn’t seem likely.
Think you are misunderstanding how Thunderbolt works, it's basically like exposing bits of your innards to the world via a connector, and the whole works relies on PCI Express as the hardware transport mechanism. That's all very much PC and X86 territory, there are no expansion buses at all from what I understand within the iPad, much less PCI Express ones. I can't see the existing iPad getting this at all. However, a newer iPad next time with a revised motherboard architecture might make is possible, but I doubt it will ever see the light of day as a host device, probably only as an endpoint device (it's not going to have 2 ports for passing through) for increased syncing speed? I've probably just contradicted myself there but never mind!
Nop. No carbon. This requires a completely different production process. And carbon production is difficult to scale up.
Its also prone to all kinds of problems, like cracking sounds when stressed and very easily scratching or 'shaving'. Look at the bicycle industry for details.
It is very probable that a future pad, pod, MacBook iMac has a unibody liquid metal shell.
It has three advantages compared to aluminum: it's cheap and light and can be injected in a casting mold.
Whether or not they use carbon fibre, your statement about liquid metal is wrong.
- not lighter
- not cheaper
In fact, it's metal just like any other so it's far heavier than carbon fibre. It's also prohibitively expensive for large scale (bigger than a tiny cog or gear) use. This is why it failed to catch on in consumer products requiring Apple to essentially rescue the company from bankruptcy by offering millions of dollars for an exclusive licence.
One things seems to still be overlooked the day after the MBP announcements: Will the next iPad get Thunderbolt? Is that what that mDP looking port is for on those leaked case designs?
The placement of that potential mDP port seems odd to me. I want to know if it?s possible for Thunderbolt to be added to the system directly with the pinout using the deprecated FireWire ports in the 30-pin dock connector.
There are no specs of Thunderbolt?s pinouts, but we do have details for both the 30-pin connector and DisplayPort.Could the 6 pins for USB3.0 built into DP, be used for Thunderbolt data transfer for a direct 6-pin exchange for the 30-pin dock connector? I sure hope so! Note that Thunderbolt pushes less power than FW does, and that DP and mDP ports have the same number of pins.
Note that if the iPad 2 doesn?t have this that the other iDevices surely won?t get this as it?s a very large chip for a mobile device. Apple might have a less powerful, smaller version of the Thunderbolt chip for iDevices that, say, push half the data, but so far that doesn?t seem likely.
Hey ... get back to work!
i guess that boeing is going to recall (not released yet) the 787 dreamliner because the fuselage is too large. there is so much misinformation about the properties of cf that it's almost not worth discussing.
btw, most of the indy 500 and daytona racers use them on their brake linings. in fact if you have money and love your ferrari (etc) you can already order cf brake pads. and as far as conductivity, it's better than copper.
and the price will come down as new evolutionary manufacturing techniques are already being used.
i guess that boeing is going to recall (not released yet) the 787 dreamliner because the fuselage is too large. there is so much misinformation about the properties of cf that it's almost not worth discussing.
btw, most of the indy 500 and daytona racers use them on their brake linings. in fact if you have money and love your ferrari (etc) you can already order cf brake pads. and as far as conductivity, it's better than copper.
and the price will come down as new evolutionary manufacturing techniques are already being used.
I was referring to the comments about using Liquid Metal, although either way I did say it was my impression, and wasn't trying to report opinion as fact