No, the iPhone 4 has 'gorilla' glass on the FRONT only, the back is not made from 'gorilla' glass.
As pointed out by Ireland, it is not 'Gorilla' glass.
It is aluminosilicate glass (similar to gorillas products) this is a chemically strengthened glass product and is expensive, which is why the back panel is made from cheaper glass and is more prone to scratches. I have an iPhone 4 and have had no issues with either the front or rear glass scratching but did get a couple of marks on the steel band caused by the rubber bumper case.
When I said gorilla glass, I was using that as a catch-all term for any synthetically engineered strengthened glass product. I was under the impression that while Apple did go with a strengthened glass product for iP4, that they did not use the actual Gorilla brand. So are you saying that the front glass of IP4 is actual Gorilla Glass, and the back is not? I thought I remembered from the launch video for iP4 that the front and back were the same type of glass.
I find that hard to believe. The iPad has a big logo on the back, and it wasn't good enough for cellular reception, they had to add another hole at the top.
Probably that had something to do with the WiFi antenna already being behind the Apple logo on the iPad, and the iPad case not having the external antenna band around it. For the iPhone 5, the 3G/CDMA antenna's could be placed behind the logo, and the WiFi antenna in an antenna band similar to the iPhone 4. That would fix the risk of dropping calls when touching the antenna. Attenuating the WiFi signal should be much less of an issue since you don't use it to make calls, your usually closer to the access point, and if I understand correctly, WiFi can use much signal higher energy anyway to compensate for a weak connection. So I'd say it is possible.
Doesn't matter what kind of glass it is made of, an all glass iPhone was never a good idea. My daughter is good with her phone but all of her friends phones already look like they have been jumped on by a gorilla.
Seriously, if Apple thought putting 3G in the Apple logo was a good idea, they would have done it with the iPad, which has a much larger Apple logo.
Yeah, it's one of the clues telling you that this whole report is bogus nonsense.
Apple is not going to replace the giant steel antenna they currently have on the outside of the device for a smaller antenna with poorer reception located inside the device. Even if they did, encasing that smaller antenna inside an aluminium shell is just doubling-down on the stupidity.
The Wi-Fi antenna on the iPad already has problems and it has literally 8 times the surface area of the logo on the iPhone. Additionally, talk of a "special resin" that conducts Wi-Fi is pure garbage and whomever uttered the words knows sweet f*ck-all about science, eletro-magnetics, design or probably anything at all. Plastic is plastic, they are pretty much all radio-transparent.
The iPhone 4 is the best design they've come out with for a while, significantly changing it up after the very first time they use it is the stupidest thing Apple could do (at least without a clear reason to do so). I would expect the next two or three iPhones will use this same basic design of the annular metal ring and the two radio-transparent cover plates. It's a fabulous design and it works really well in practice.
Another way to look at it is if you look at each of Apple's products, the first model is usually quite different from the rest and by the time they get to the second or perhaps third model, they usually have the design kind of "set in stone" and the only things that change from there on in are details. It was the same with the iPod, and the Air and lots of other stuff too.
iPhone 4 is the reference design IMO and it won't change significantly for a while. Thinner and smaller perhaps, different materials for the back plate maybe (but not aluminium), but I wouldn't expect any real design changes.
This is hilarious. When the glass sandwich design was leaked around this time a year ago everyone was up in arms... "that's so ugly... the curved back is so much nicer" and now a curved back design is leaked and everyone is up in arms... "that's so ugly... the glass back is so much nicer"
- embedding Solar Panel under the glass, so phone can get charged from Ambient light. A panel the size of the iPhone4, would generate decent bit of electricity.
- Apple now allows engraving for customizing phones. Glass could be used to embed photos internally. Apple could allow you to upload a photo, print it out, and embed it behind the glass.
I think there is also a question to be asked, why not use gorilla glass for the back, like the front. If it works for the front panel, should definitely work for the back panel! In terms of cost, I am sure it will cost more, but can't be more than a dollar or two more, for each iPhone. It is worth it for Apple to use Gorilla Glass, considering how the margins Apple has on this device.
I guess Gorilla glass might be marginally heavier than the normal glass Apple uses on the iPhone4 - but again, this is a small price to pay. Apple can easily get the weight reduced by reducing the battery size, and using an embedded solar panel to get better battery life. This is the sort of innovation one would expect from Apple.
Today it is actually possible to have a Solar Film PRINTED on the Gorilla glass - so there will not be any increase in thickness/weight because of this panel.
iPhone 4 is the reference design IMO and it won't change significantly for a while. Thinner and smaller perhaps, different materials for the back plate maybe (but not aluminium), but I wouldn't expect any real design changes.
You make some good points. And I agree that it is weird for Apple to completely start over and throw out the iP4 playbook design after only one product cycle. But, they do have to make it clear that they have addressed the major design concerns in order to convince users to upgrade.
Even if the Antenna problem didn't turn out to be as huge as some detractors had hoped, it was still an issue. And I think Apple really wants that monkey off their back once and for all. They don't have to come out with a complete redesign, but it has to appear that they eliminated the antenna issue, or greatly minimized it. Whether the antenna is internal or external is anyone's guess. I like the idea of external, if it works. A coating perhaps?
Likewise, the back glass panel, while pretty and industrial, is just too fragile. They definitely need to change this up. I'm okay with plastic (resin) as long as it doesn;t feel as cheap as my 3Gs. I'm very curious to see what happens in June as I am ready to upgrade.
Probably that had something to do with the WiFi antenna already being behind the Apple logo on the iPad, and the iPad case not having the external antenna band around it. For the iPhone 5, the 3G/CDMA antenna's could be placed behind the logo, and the WiFi antenna in an antenna band similar to the iPhone 4. That would fix the risk of dropping calls when touching the antenna. Attenuating the WiFi signal should be much less of an issue since you don't use it to make calls, your usually closer to the access point, and if I understand correctly, WiFi can use much signal higher energy anyway to compensate for a weak connection. So I'd say it is possible.
If they were keeping the same design, why would they go with an aluminum back in the first place? Furthermore, the rumor is that Apple will abandon the steel bands and run 3G and WiFi thorough the logo.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Apple is also rumored to be looking to abandon the steel outer frame of the iPhone 4, which doubles as the device's antennas. That design decision led to bad publicity when it was discovered that covering a section of the antenna could degrade a wireless signal.
Instead, the report claims that Apple will use a special resin for the Apple logo on the back of the device. Cellular and Wi-Fi data will reportedly travel through the logo, just like Wi-Fi does on the iPad.
Glass lends itself to immense new possibilities -....
- Apple now allows engraving for customizing phones. Glass could be used to embed photos internally. Apple could allow you to upload a photo, print it out, and embed it behind the glass.
If Apple goes with a glass back again, then your thoughts on it having a solar panel is an excellent idea. However, no offense to you personally, but having a physical photo printed and embedded behind the glass back sounds like an awful idea. I can't imagine Apple ever doing something like this.
As far as customization is concerned, it would be nice if Apple could figure out a way to come up with a way to deliver different colors of metal. And I don't mean a way to color the outside of the metal, because this always ends up scratching or flaking off. From there it looks like they delivered a crap product and the class action lawsuits start to fly. What I would like is a way for them to have the aluminum (or whatever metal) actually be a different color throughout. Then having some custom colors (black, gunmetal gray, midnight blue, etc.) could look really cool.
Aluminum? Really? Look, I don't know of a single aluminum-backed iPod that is free of scratches. I do know iPhone 4s that are free of scratches. But yeah, these rumors…>_>
Quote:
Originally Posted by irnchriz
I had an original iPhone and the aluminium scratched incredibly easily. They should just do the back in gorilla glass.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OllieWallieWhiskers
i think you've confused your metals.
my aluminum 2nd gen iPod nano is pretty scratch free... there are dings and dents from the several times i've dropped it... but very few scratches.
i really wish Apple would turn to aluminum on the iPod touch... the current stainless steel back scratches way to easily.
The iPod touches have polished stainless steel, like Ollie says, and it is impossible to keep scratch-free. The first time you wipe off a fingerprint, you get a scratch, even with the softest cloth. That's the way stainless is, very soft, scratchable by dust particles when they are wiped off.
The aluminium (Ive's pronounciation) on the iPod nanos I have -- the video version, don't remember the gen. number -- are coated with some glossy finish that doesn't seem to scratch at all easily, but it is shiny-cold, and would not be a pleasant finish for a flat slab such as an iPhone would have. I wonder if it's an anodizing. It seems like a clear plastic, though. Not very slippery.
Best-looking metal finish yet IMO is the brushed and/or bead-blasted plain, uncoated (but anodized?) aluminium of the iPad and iMac, but I don't know its scratch resistence, since mine's been in a case since day one last April. It shows some polishing from the case flap, so it's probably pretty scratchable. And it is a lot slippier than glass or the coated nano, oddly.
I have no experience with the first iPhone. What was that like?
You make some good points. And I agree that it is weird for Apple to completely start over and throw out the iP4 playbook design after only one product cycle. But, they do have to make it clear that they have addressed the major design concerns in order to convince users to upgrade. ...
I agree with you but we disagree on the bolded part which makes all the difference in the world.
IMO, there are no "major design concerns" that's all just media hype. So yes, I would agree if they do change the design, that would be a good reason, but on the other hand, I don't think that reason exists in the real world.
So that takes me back to thinking they won't redesign it because there aren't any real design problems with the current one.
Why the fuss over wear-marks on a tool that you carry and handle daily? If it's a work for art for you, put it in a case, wear cotton gloves, or just keep it framed on the wall.
I agree with you but we disagree on the bolded part which makes all the difference in the world.
IMO, there are no "major design concerns" that's all just media hype. So yes, I would agree if they do change the design, that would be a good reason, but on the other hand, I don't think that reason exists in the real world.
So that takes me back to thinking they won't redesign it because there aren't any real design problems with the current one.
I purposely said concerns as opposed to flaws to lessen the severity. I don't think they are flaws per se, I just think improvement is needed. They are at least concerns that I have. And even if it is a perception issue with antennas, it is still a concern for a good number of people. I don't think the iP4 antennas are inferior by any means. In fact, I think they are great in most ways. I just think Apple needs to find a process to tweak them, either giving them a coating, or attaching them differently, or maybe even having multiple antennas for each purpose to add redundancy. And likely there are other cool engineering tricks that I am unaware of. This is all I would need, just an effort to improve it.
As for the glass back, I definitely have concerns here. The glass back is gorgeous and feels really really good. But I don't want to have to use a case. And if the back glass is not strong enough to withstand a drop or two without cracking, then they have to make a change.
There isn't much left to guess about though is there?
I think I'd rather start seeing the rumor mill churn on iOS 5, which is much more far-reaching for apple, and also not much is known yet.
Yes, I agree. At last week's event, I was looking forward to seeing a preview of iOS 5 more than the hardware of iPad 2. The smartphone space underwent enormous hardware jumps from 2007-2010 but I feel like it is getting mature now. The real differentiation is in the software.
I'm curious when iOS 5 will debut/arrive! Usually they preview it in March and release it in June. But a big ol March event (iPad 2) just came and went with no word. I suspect that they need some extra time to reconcile the different form factors that iOS runs on (iPhone vs. iPad). Knowing Apple, they want any/all differences to be minimal and super elegant. I hope it isn't pushed back to a June preview + September launch timeline - I plan on getting an iPad 2!
I do admire Apple though, for their patience. They're not always the first to bring something, but when they do it's 100% thought out and beautiful. Here's hoping that they'll bring the same magic to notifications and other iOS upgrades.
Why the fuss over wear-marks on a tool that you carry and handle daily? If it's a work for art for you, put it in a case, wear cotton gloves, or just keep it framed on the wall.
Ya got a point. I went on at length because some were confusing polished stainless steel with aluminium, and nobody has talked about the coating on the nanos, that I know of. But the scratch level on the stainless touches would be completely unacceptable on the Phone, which is supposed to be an art piece. Matte aluminium would be ok with usage marks (has character, after all) but it's way too slippery in its iPad form for a phone.
Edit: In fact, the original report seems to conflate stainless and aluminium, according to AI, but it's hard for me to tell from the Chinese (!).
Comments
No, the iPhone 4 has 'gorilla' glass on the FRONT only, the back is not made from 'gorilla' glass.
As pointed out by Ireland, it is not 'Gorilla' glass.
It is aluminosilicate glass (similar to gorillas products) this is a chemically strengthened glass product and is expensive, which is why the back panel is made from cheaper glass and is more prone to scratches. I have an iPhone 4 and have had no issues with either the front or rear glass scratching but did get a couple of marks on the steel band caused by the rubber bumper case.
When I said gorilla glass, I was using that as a catch-all term for any synthetically engineered strengthened glass product. I was under the impression that while Apple did go with a strengthened glass product for iP4, that they did not use the actual Gorilla brand. So are you saying that the front glass of IP4 is actual Gorilla Glass, and the back is not? I thought I remembered from the launch video for iP4 that the front and back were the same type of glass.
I find that hard to believe. The iPad has a big logo on the back, and it wasn't good enough for cellular reception, they had to add another hole at the top.
Probably that had something to do with the WiFi antenna already being behind the Apple logo on the iPad, and the iPad case not having the external antenna band around it. For the iPhone 5, the 3G/CDMA antenna's could be placed behind the logo, and the WiFi antenna in an antenna band similar to the iPhone 4. That would fix the risk of dropping calls when touching the antenna. Attenuating the WiFi signal should be much less of an issue since you don't use it to make calls, your usually closer to the access point, and if I understand correctly, WiFi can use much signal higher energy anyway to compensate for a weak connection. So I'd say it is possible.
This is completely false.
Doesn't matter what kind of glass it is made of, an all glass iPhone was never a good idea. My daughter is good with her phone but all of her friends phones already look like they have been jumped on by a gorilla.
Most people case their phone anyways.
Did you know that there are at least two thousand different specialty resins used in in plastic injection molding?
I am sure many of them make a better option then a glass back.
i don't understand. something must have been lost in transalation.
do they mean "light weight" as in durability (in regards to shattering)?
Seriously, if Apple thought putting 3G in the Apple logo was a good idea, they would have done it with the iPad, which has a much larger Apple logo.
Yeah, it's one of the clues telling you that this whole report is bogus nonsense.
Apple is not going to replace the giant steel antenna they currently have on the outside of the device for a smaller antenna with poorer reception located inside the device. Even if they did, encasing that smaller antenna inside an aluminium shell is just doubling-down on the stupidity.
The Wi-Fi antenna on the iPad already has problems and it has literally 8 times the surface area of the logo on the iPhone. Additionally, talk of a "special resin" that conducts Wi-Fi is pure garbage and whomever uttered the words knows sweet f*ck-all about science, eletro-magnetics, design or probably anything at all. Plastic is plastic, they are pretty much all radio-transparent.
The iPhone 4 is the best design they've come out with for a while, significantly changing it up after the very first time they use it is the stupidest thing Apple could do (at least without a clear reason to do so). I would expect the next two or three iPhones will use this same basic design of the annular metal ring and the two radio-transparent cover plates. It's a fabulous design and it works really well in practice.
Another way to look at it is if you look at each of Apple's products, the first model is usually quite different from the rest and by the time they get to the second or perhaps third model, they usually have the design kind of "set in stone" and the only things that change from there on in are details. It was the same with the iPod, and the Air and lots of other stuff too.
iPhone 4 is the reference design IMO and it won't change significantly for a while. Thinner and smaller perhaps, different materials for the back plate maybe (but not aluminium), but I wouldn't expect any real design changes.
- embedding Solar Panel under the glass, so phone can get charged from Ambient light. A panel the size of the iPhone4, would generate decent bit of electricity.
- Apple now allows engraving for customizing phones. Glass could be used to embed photos internally. Apple could allow you to upload a photo, print it out, and embed it behind the glass.
I think there is also a question to be asked, why not use gorilla glass for the back, like the front. If it works for the front panel, should definitely work for the back panel! In terms of cost, I am sure it will cost more, but can't be more than a dollar or two more, for each iPhone. It is worth it for Apple to use Gorilla Glass, considering how the margins Apple has on this device.
I guess Gorilla glass might be marginally heavier than the normal glass Apple uses on the iPhone4 - but again, this is a small price to pay. Apple can easily get the weight reduced by reducing the battery size, and using an embedded solar panel to get better battery life. This is the sort of innovation one would expect from Apple.
Today it is actually possible to have a Solar Film PRINTED on the Gorilla glass - so there will not be any increase in thickness/weight because of this panel.
iPhone 4 is the reference design IMO and it won't change significantly for a while. Thinner and smaller perhaps, different materials for the back plate maybe (but not aluminium), but I wouldn't expect any real design changes.
You make some good points. And I agree that it is weird for Apple to completely start over and throw out the iP4 playbook design after only one product cycle. But, they do have to make it clear that they have addressed the major design concerns in order to convince users to upgrade.
Even if the Antenna problem didn't turn out to be as huge as some detractors had hoped, it was still an issue. And I think Apple really wants that monkey off their back once and for all. They don't have to come out with a complete redesign, but it has to appear that they eliminated the antenna issue, or greatly minimized it. Whether the antenna is internal or external is anyone's guess. I like the idea of external, if it works. A coating perhaps?
Likewise, the back glass panel, while pretty and industrial, is just too fragile. They definitely need to change this up. I'm okay with plastic (resin) as long as it doesn;t feel as cheap as my 3Gs. I'm very curious to see what happens in June as I am ready to upgrade.
Probably that had something to do with the WiFi antenna already being behind the Apple logo on the iPad, and the iPad case not having the external antenna band around it. For the iPhone 5, the 3G/CDMA antenna's could be placed behind the logo, and the WiFi antenna in an antenna band similar to the iPhone 4. That would fix the risk of dropping calls when touching the antenna. Attenuating the WiFi signal should be much less of an issue since you don't use it to make calls, your usually closer to the access point, and if I understand correctly, WiFi can use much signal higher energy anyway to compensate for a weak connection. So I'd say it is possible.
If they were keeping the same design, why would they go with an aluminum back in the first place? Furthermore, the rumor is that Apple will abandon the steel bands and run 3G and WiFi thorough the logo.
Apple is also rumored to be looking to abandon the steel outer frame of the iPhone 4, which doubles as the device's antennas. That design decision led to bad publicity when it was discovered that covering a section of the antenna could degrade a wireless signal.
Instead, the report claims that Apple will use a special resin for the Apple logo on the back of the device. Cellular and Wi-Fi data will reportedly travel through the logo, just like Wi-Fi does on the iPad.
Glass lends itself to immense new possibilities -....
- Apple now allows engraving for customizing phones. Glass could be used to embed photos internally. Apple could allow you to upload a photo, print it out, and embed it behind the glass.
If Apple goes with a glass back again, then your thoughts on it having a solar panel is an excellent idea. However, no offense to you personally, but having a physical photo printed and embedded behind the glass back sounds like an awful idea. I can't imagine Apple ever doing something like this.
As far as customization is concerned, it would be nice if Apple could figure out a way to come up with a way to deliver different colors of metal. And I don't mean a way to color the outside of the metal, because this always ends up scratching or flaking off. From there it looks like they delivered a crap product and the class action lawsuits start to fly. What I would like is a way for them to have the aluminum (or whatever metal) actually be a different color throughout. Then having some custom colors (black, gunmetal gray, midnight blue, etc.) could look really cool.
Aluminum? Really? Look, I don't know of a single aluminum-backed iPod that is free of scratches. I do know iPhone 4s that are free of scratches. But yeah, these rumors…>_>
I had an original iPhone and the aluminium scratched incredibly easily. They should just do the back in gorilla glass.
i think you've confused your metals.
my aluminum 2nd gen iPod nano is pretty scratch free... there are dings and dents from the several times i've dropped it... but very few scratches.
i really wish Apple would turn to aluminum on the iPod touch... the current stainless steel back scratches way to easily.
The iPod touches have polished stainless steel, like Ollie says, and it is impossible to keep scratch-free. The first time you wipe off a fingerprint, you get a scratch, even with the softest cloth. That's the way stainless is, very soft, scratchable by dust particles when they are wiped off.
The aluminium (Ive's pronounciation) on the iPod nanos I have -- the video version, don't remember the gen. number -- are coated with some glossy finish that doesn't seem to scratch at all easily, but it is shiny-cold, and would not be a pleasant finish for a flat slab such as an iPhone would have. I wonder if it's an anodizing. It seems like a clear plastic, though. Not very slippery.
Best-looking metal finish yet IMO is the brushed and/or bead-blasted plain, uncoated (but anodized?) aluminium of the iPad and iMac, but I don't know its scratch resistence, since mine's been in a case since day one last April. It shows some polishing from the case flap, so it's probably pretty scratchable. And it is a lot slippier than glass or the coated nano, oddly.
I have no experience with the first iPhone. What was that like?
You make some good points. And I agree that it is weird for Apple to completely start over and throw out the iP4 playbook design after only one product cycle. But, they do have to make it clear that they have addressed the major design concerns in order to convince users to upgrade. ...
I agree with you but we disagree on the bolded part which makes all the difference in the world.
IMO, there are no "major design concerns" that's all just media hype. So yes, I would agree if they do change the design, that would be a good reason, but on the other hand, I don't think that reason exists in the real world.
So that takes me back to thinking they won't redesign it because there aren't any real design problems with the current one.
I agree with you but we disagree on the bolded part which makes all the difference in the world.
IMO, there are no "major design concerns" that's all just media hype. So yes, I would agree if they do change the design, that would be a good reason, but on the other hand, I don't think that reason exists in the real world.
So that takes me back to thinking they won't redesign it because there aren't any real design problems with the current one.
I purposely said concerns as opposed to flaws to lessen the severity. I don't think they are flaws per se, I just think improvement is needed. They are at least concerns that I have. And even if it is a perception issue with antennas, it is still a concern for a good number of people. I don't think the iP4 antennas are inferior by any means. In fact, I think they are great in most ways. I just think Apple needs to find a process to tweak them, either giving them a coating, or attaching them differently, or maybe even having multiple antennas for each purpose to add redundancy. And likely there are other cool engineering tricks that I am unaware of. This is all I would need, just an effort to improve it.
As for the glass back, I definitely have concerns here. The glass back is gorgeous and feels really really good. But I don't want to have to use a case. And if the back glass is not strong enough to withstand a drop or two without cracking, then they have to make a change.
There isn't much left to guess about though is there?
I think I'd rather start seeing the rumor mill churn on iOS 5, which is much more far-reaching for apple, and also not much is known yet.
Yes, I agree. At last week's event, I was looking forward to seeing a preview of iOS 5 more than the hardware of iPad 2. The smartphone space underwent enormous hardware jumps from 2007-2010 but I feel like it is getting mature now. The real differentiation is in the software.
I'm curious when iOS 5 will debut/arrive! Usually they preview it in March and release it in June. But a big ol March event (iPad 2) just came and went with no word. I suspect that they need some extra time to reconcile the different form factors that iOS runs on (iPhone vs. iPad). Knowing Apple, they want any/all differences to be minimal and super elegant. I hope it isn't pushed back to a June preview + September launch timeline - I plan on getting an iPad 2!
I do admire Apple though, for their patience. They're not always the first to bring something, but when they do it's 100% thought out and beautiful. Here's hoping that they'll bring the same magic to notifications and other iOS upgrades.
iPad 2 + iOS 5 = dream
iPad 2 + iOS 5 = dream
And don't forget
BFFs4ever!
Why the fuss over wear-marks on a tool that you carry and handle daily? If it's a work for art for you, put it in a case, wear cotton gloves, or just keep it framed on the wall.
Ya got a point. I went on at length because some were confusing polished stainless steel with aluminium, and nobody has talked about the coating on the nanos, that I know of. But the scratch level on the stainless touches would be completely unacceptable on the Phone, which is supposed to be an art piece. Matte aluminium would be ok with usage marks (has character, after all) but it's way too slippery in its iPad form for a phone.
Edit: In fact, the original report seems to conflate stainless and aluminium, according to AI, but it's hard for me to tell from the Chinese (!).