A couple people here know what they are talking about.
Unfortunately, you're not one of them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgbstetson
I have not held this phone, but I suspect it is anodized and dyed. anything else would be substandard, except maybe powdercoat. A properly done anodized finish does not chip easily. It is dense aluminum oxide, a very hard substance used in abrasives. If you think this is an acceptable finish, please teach yourself about anodizing.
This process can go wrong anywhere from writing a crap finishing spec, to poor process control in bf China. If the bath is being pushed too hard, the current supply is cheap, the coating is too thin, or the finish is not sealed properly, you can get such a result. My guess is that apple or foxconn knew and shipped anyway. Because the way they are constructed does not make rework easy, and bratty consumers won't wait.
There is no chance this is powdercoated. You don't need to hold the phone to know this. Anodized aluminum does not "chip" easily but does scratch relatively easily against another hard surface (yes, there is a difference between chipping and scratching). It makes sense that the relatively sharp edge of the chamfer is vulnerable to nicks.
Crap finishing spec for anodizing? Bad sealing the cause of scratches? "Dense" aluminum oxide (what would not not-so-dense Al2O3, pray tell)? Pul-lease do not make stuff up. Anodizing hardens aluminum but even if the process is perfect, it makes the surface scratch-resistant but NOT scratch-proof.
This is NOT a manufacturing process flaw. Instead, it is what you get with anodized aluminum. The problem can be minimized with "hard anodizing" but cannot be completely prevented.
I can understand such damage will show on use, but nicks during the assembly and packing? I would think that should be preventable with easy handling precautions.
I don't recall this being a big deal with the iPod nanos and shuffles, Apple has had a few generations of each with color anodizing.
Aluminum was a dumb idea for a device that is handled on a daily basis.
Sorry, Dieter Rams would probably agree.
Sorry, he would most definitely not agree with you. There are thousands of products using anodized aluminum on a surface regularly handled by hands. What is a dumb idea is invoking the name of Dieter Rams when you are clearly neither qualified to criticize Apple designers nor knowledgeable enough about Rams's design, history and design principles to say what he would agree or disagree with. You sound like the type of person who would say "Steve would not have approved this", while forgetting the first iPhone has an anodized aluminum back.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodlink
That said, is aluminum CHEAPER to mill than plastic is to mold?
No.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodlink
Is Apple's reasoning to use aluminum solely based on costs to produce?
No, their reason is that they are against cheap plastic on principle.
I can understand such will show on use, but knicks during the assembly and packing? I would think that should be preventable with easy handling precautions.
I don't recall this being a big deal with the iPod nanos and shuffles, Apple has had a few generations of each with color anodizing.
That is indeed a puzzle. But we have seen from past iPhone launches that a small percentage of them will be less than perfect. Lest we forget, 5 million units were sold!!!! Is it unreasonable that a few dozens were dropped? Ideally, they should not have been packaged and shipped but those "student interns" are under serious pressure to build "thousands" each day, aren't they?
How many whiners are honestly whining about out-of-the-box scratches and how many of them are in fact scuffing the devices themselves while handling them?
While we are discussing the merits of aluminum, does anyone understand why the Lumia 920 is soooooo heavy (180 grams!!!) despite sporting polycarbonate?
While we are discussing the merits of aluminum, does anyone understand why the Lumia 920 is soooooo heavy (180 grams!!!) despite sporting polycarbonate?
I'm sure there are other factors. The PC shell didn't look overly thick, I don't think it would need to be.
Battery for one: 920's battery is 2000mAh, iPhone 5 is 1440 mAh.
Maybe there's also an extra layer of glass, when Apple managed to integrate the touch sensor into the display's glass, rather in a separate layer above it? The 920's screen is larger.
I'm sure there are other factors. The PC shell didn't look overly thick, I don't think it would need to be.
Battery for one: 920's battery is 2000mAh, iPhone 5 is 1440 mAh.
Maybe there's also an extra layer of glass, when Apple managed to integrate the touch sensor into the display's glass, rather in a separate layer above it? The 920's screen is larger.
All good reasons, to a degree. The problem is that Nokia's latest and greatest is not just heavy when compared to the emaciated iPhone 5 (112 g), it is substantially heavier than the Galaxy SIII, HTC One X, Motorola RAZR M, all of which not coincidentally weighing in at a bit above or below 130 g. To be precise, the Lumia 920 is 50 g heavier than the Android beasts. Does Windows Phone 8 weigh that much?
Different products, different parts call for different principles. A battery charger made out of anodized aluminum might be slightly shocking. You may also recall that the Mac Mini changed from having plastic top and bottom to an aluminum unibody. They tried plastic backs on iP3G and iP3GS, and I doubt they will return to it.
And it is a matter of principle - so much so that they left plastic behind even though it could have made antenna design easier.
Sorry, he would most definitely not agree with you. There are thousands of products using anodized aluminum on a surface regularly handled by hands. What is a dumb idea is invoking the name of Dieter Rams when you are clearly neither qualified to criticize Apple designers nor knowledgeable enough about Rams's design, history and design principles to say what he would agree or disagree with. You sound like the type of person who would say "Steve would not have approved this", while forgetting the first iPhone has an anodized aluminum back.
No.
No, their reason is that they are against cheap plastic on principle.
What qualifies you to discount my thought that he WOULD NOT agree with me?
BTW, I have a MFA in Fine Arts
Not trolling, just expressing my thoughts and asking a legitimate question.
Laptops, yea even the shiny ones that Apple makes, usually find there way into a soft cushioned cradle called a laptop bag.
And this means what to me? More importantly, this means what to the argument at hand? Explain how they're different without trying to worm out of the discussion via a "case". Because phones can use cases, too. You want to bring cases into the discussion, that's fine; it just invalidates your original point entirely.
Sorry, he would most definitely not agree with you. There are thousands of products using anodized aluminum on a surface regularly handled by hands. What is a dumb idea is invoking the name of Dieter Rams when you are clearly neither qualified to criticize Apple designers nor knowledgeable enough about Rams's design, history and design principles to say what he would agree or disagree with. You sound like the type of person who would say "Steve would not have approved this", while forgetting the first iPhone has an anodized aluminum back.
No.
No, their reason is that they are against cheap plastic on principle.
What qualifies you to discount my thought that he WOULD NOT agree with me?
No offense, but your comment speaks for itself. His body of work speaks for where he stands on use of aluminum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodlink
BTW, I have a MFA in Fine Arts
So? Your comment clearly showed you were unfamiliar with Rams's work and unforunately unaware of wide use of aluminum in consumer goods, including many handheld products.
Laptops, yea even the shiny ones that Apple makes, usually find there way into a soft cushioned cradle called a laptop bag.
But you know all this already...you are the omniscient Tallest Skil.
Whatever.
I still think Al was a stupid material to utilize for a handheld device.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
And this means what to me? More importantly, this means what to the argument at hand? Explain how they're different without trying to worm out of the discussion via a "case". Because phones can use cases, too. You want to bring cases into the discussion, that's fine; it just invalidates your original point entirely.
It does seem silly to mention cases and conveniently forget that iPhones are more lovingly covered up than laptops.
All good reasons, to a degree. The problem is that Nokia's latest and greatest is not just heavy when compared to the emaciated iPhone 5 (112 g), it is substantially heavier than the Galaxy SIII, HTC One X, Motorola RAZR M, all of which not coincidentally weighing in at a bit above or below 130 g. To be precise, the Lumia 920 is 50 g heavier than the Android beasts. Does Windows Phone 8 weigh that much?
To be clear, is this tangential to the PC / Al discussion? Galaxy S III has a PC shell as well.
Other than that, I don't know. The glass might be really thick to do the unusual curved look.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgbstetson
A couple people here know what they are talking about.
Unfortunately, you're not one of them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgbstetson
I have not held this phone, but I suspect it is anodized and dyed. anything else would be substandard, except maybe powdercoat. A properly done anodized finish does not chip easily. It is dense aluminum oxide, a very hard substance used in abrasives. If you think this is an acceptable finish, please teach yourself about anodizing.
This process can go wrong anywhere from writing a crap finishing spec, to poor process control in bf China. If the bath is being pushed too hard, the current supply is cheap, the coating is too thin, or the finish is not sealed properly, you can get such a result. My guess is that apple or foxconn knew and shipped anyway. Because the way they are constructed does not make rework easy, and bratty consumers won't wait.
There is no chance this is powdercoated. You don't need to hold the phone to know this. Anodized aluminum does not "chip" easily but does scratch relatively easily against another hard surface (yes, there is a difference between chipping and scratching). It makes sense that the relatively sharp edge of the chamfer is vulnerable to nicks.
Crap finishing spec for anodizing? Bad sealing the cause of scratches? "Dense" aluminum oxide (what would not not-so-dense Al2O3, pray tell)? Pul-lease do not make stuff up. Anodizing hardens aluminum but even if the process is perfect, it makes the surface scratch-resistant but NOT scratch-proof.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Stupid laptops.
Not to mention stupid water bottles, that stupid first iPhone, many versions of iPod/iPod Nano, flashlights, cameras, ...
I can understand such damage will show on use, but nicks during the assembly and packing? I would think that should be preventable with easy handling precautions.
I don't recall this being a big deal with the iPod nanos and shuffles, Apple has had a few generations of each with color anodizing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodlink
Aluminum was a dumb idea for a device that is handled on a daily basis.
Sorry, Dieter Rams would probably agree.
Sorry, he would most definitely not agree with you. There are thousands of products using anodized aluminum on a surface regularly handled by hands. What is a dumb idea is invoking the name of Dieter Rams when you are clearly neither qualified to criticize Apple designers nor knowledgeable enough about Rams's design, history and design principles to say what he would agree or disagree with. You sound like the type of person who would say "Steve would not have approved this", while forgetting the first iPhone has an anodized aluminum back.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodlink
That said, is aluminum CHEAPER to mill than plastic is to mold?
No.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodlink
Is Apple's reasoning to use aluminum solely based on costs to produce?
No, their reason is that they are against cheap plastic on principle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
I can understand such will show on use, but knicks during the assembly and packing? I would think that should be preventable with easy handling precautions.
I don't recall this being a big deal with the iPod nanos and shuffles, Apple has had a few generations of each with color anodizing.
That is indeed a puzzle. But we have seen from past iPhone launches that a small percentage of them will be less than perfect. Lest we forget, 5 million units were sold!!!! Is it unreasonable that a few dozens were dropped? Ideally, they should not have been packaged and shipped but those "student interns" are under serious pressure to build "thousands" each day, aren't they?
How many whiners are honestly whining about out-of-the-box scratches and how many of them are in fact scuffing the devices themselves while handling them?
Originally Posted by Harbinger
No, their reason is that they are against cheap plastic on principle.
Nope. Aluminum just serves their purposes better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Nope. Aluminum just serves their purposes better.
I don't disagree, but your point doesn't necessarily invalidate mine, which I am pretty sure of.
While we are discussing the merits of aluminum, does anyone understand why the Lumia 920 is soooooo heavy (180 grams!!!) despite sporting polycarbonate?
I'm sure there are other factors. The PC shell didn't look overly thick, I don't think it would need to be.
Battery for one: 920's battery is 2000mAh, iPhone 5 is 1440 mAh.
Maybe there's also an extra layer of glass, when Apple managed to integrate the touch sensor into the display's glass, rather in a separate layer above it? The 920's screen is larger.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
I'm sure there are other factors. The PC shell didn't look overly thick, I don't think it would need to be.
Battery for one: 920's battery is 2000mAh, iPhone 5 is 1440 mAh.
Maybe there's also an extra layer of glass, when Apple managed to integrate the touch sensor into the display's glass, rather in a separate layer above it? The 920's screen is larger.
All good reasons, to a degree. The problem is that Nokia's latest and greatest is not just heavy when compared to the emaciated iPhone 5 (112 g), it is substantially heavier than the Galaxy SIII, HTC One X, Motorola RAZR M, all of which not coincidentally weighing in at a bit above or below 130 g. To be precise, the Lumia 920 is 50 g heavier than the Android beasts. Does Windows Phone 8 weigh that much?
Originally Posted by Harbinger
I don't disagree, but your point doesn't necessarily invalidate mine, which I am pretty sure of.
Were they against it on principle, these products would look much different.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Were they against it on principle, these products would look much different.
Cute, clever, elaborate linking.
Different products, different parts call for different principles. A battery charger made out of anodized aluminum might be slightly shocking. You may also recall that the Mac Mini changed from having plastic top and bottom to an aluminum unibody. They tried plastic backs on iP3G and iP3GS, and I doubt they will return to it.
And it is a matter of principle - so much so that they left plastic behind even though it could have made antenna design easier.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Stupid laptops.
OK Mr. Smarty Pants.
A phone goes in your pocket, your purse, etc....
Laptops, yea even the shiny ones that Apple makes, usually find there way into a soft cushioned cradle called a laptop bag.
But you know all this already...you are the omniscient Tallest Skil.
Whatever.
I still think Al was a stupid material to utilize for a handheld device.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harbinger
Sorry, he would most definitely not agree with you. There are thousands of products using anodized aluminum on a surface regularly handled by hands. What is a dumb idea is invoking the name of Dieter Rams when you are clearly neither qualified to criticize Apple designers nor knowledgeable enough about Rams's design, history and design principles to say what he would agree or disagree with. You sound like the type of person who would say "Steve would not have approved this", while forgetting the first iPhone has an anodized aluminum back.
No.
No, their reason is that they are against cheap plastic on principle.
What qualifies you to discount my thought that he WOULD NOT agree with me?
BTW, I have a MFA in Fine Arts
Not trolling, just expressing my thoughts and asking a legitimate question.
Originally Posted by Woodlink
Laptops, yea even the shiny ones that Apple makes, usually find there way into a soft cushioned cradle called a laptop bag.
And this means what to me? More importantly, this means what to the argument at hand? Explain how they're different without trying to worm out of the discussion via a "case". Because phones can use cases, too. You want to bring cases into the discussion, that's fine; it just invalidates your original point entirely.
So what was the 3G/S made with?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
So what was the 3G/S made with?
Try reading what I wrote instead of tripping over yourself with a gotcha.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodlink
What qualifies you to discount my thought that he WOULD NOT agree with me?
No offense, but your comment speaks for itself. His body of work speaks for where he stands on use of aluminum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodlink
BTW, I have a MFA in Fine Arts
So? Your comment clearly showed you were unfamiliar with Rams's work and unforunately unaware of wide use of aluminum in consumer goods, including many handheld products.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodlink
OK Mr. Smarty Pants.
A phone goes in your pocket, your purse, etc....
Laptops, yea even the shiny ones that Apple makes, usually find there way into a soft cushioned cradle called a laptop bag.
But you know all this already...you are the omniscient Tallest Skil.
Whatever.
I still think Al was a stupid material to utilize for a handheld device.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
And this means what to me? More importantly, this means what to the argument at hand? Explain how they're different without trying to worm out of the discussion via a "case". Because phones can use cases, too. You want to bring cases into the discussion, that's fine; it just invalidates your original point entirely.
It does seem silly to mention cases and conveniently forget that iPhones are more lovingly covered up than laptops.
To be clear, is this tangential to the PC / Al discussion? Galaxy S III has a PC shell as well.
Other than that, I don't know. The glass might be really thick to do the unusual curved look.